New line of trawlers, built in Pacific NW, about to debut
 

On Feb 1, 3:44?am, wrote:
On Jan 31, 10:47 pm, "Chuck Gould" wrote:

Watch for a new line of trawlers, built in Washington State, by a
company called Fathom Yachts. Their first boat, a 40-footer, will be
coming down the way within about a month. The drawings, model, and
spec look promising. (Many of the founding members of this firm once
worked at a well-known tug builder.)

Not satisfied with pimping phantom diesel fuel enhancement devices
under
the guise of intellectual curiosity, Chuck is now pimping another new
over-priced
trawler that nobody cares about in this group except for Chuck.

Go post it in rec.boats.cruising loser.

Sailors have very little interest in trawlers.

Are your personal attack threads well received on that site?

New line of trawlers, built in Pacific NW, about to debut
 

On Feb 1, 4:03?am, JLH wrote:
On 1 Feb 2007 03:44:36 -0800, wrote:

On Jan 31, 10:47 pm, "Chuck Gould" wrote:
Watch for a new line of trawlers, built in Washington State, by a
company called Fathom Yachts. Their first boat, a 40-footer, will be
coming down the way within about a month. The drawings, model, and
spec look promising. (Many of the founding members of this firm once
worked at a well-known tug builder.)

Not satisfied with pimping phantom diesel fuel enhancement devices
under
the guise of intellectual curiosity, Chuck is now pimping another new
over-priced
trawler that nobody cares about in this group except for Chuck.

Go post it in rec.boats.cruising loser.

Hey Chuck, is it this style -http://tinyurl.com/22xy74? Maybe you could
post a url to a picture if it isn't. Sounds cool.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."


Here's a link:

http://www.gregmarshalldesign.com/te....php?boa_id=42


The interesting thing about the images on that page is that they
feature a boat that didn't exist when the images were created. They
are still completing hull #1. What you see on the web page is the
result of taking the naval architect's drawing and using a computer to
superimpose it on a background. Take a careful look and you will see
that she doesn't sit her lines just exactly right in the photos, but
that's because the boat wasn't really in the picture when it was
taken.

New line of trawlers, continued
 

On Feb 1, 7:45?am, Harry Krause wrote:
On 2/1/2007 10:30 AM, Chuck Gould wrote:





On Feb 1, 3:51?am, wrote:
On Jan 31, 10:49 pm, "Chuck Gould" wrote:

The Fathom 40 is a pilothouse style vessel, with traditonal workboat
proportions but somewhat modernized lines.
Very clever - now a guerilla marketing campaign. Pimping to posts he
doesn't like.

You know, you have to wonder how much money is being made here. How
much
is Mr. Gould being paid per post pimping these overpriced, useless
boats?

It's not like it hasn't been done before you know - it's called spam.

Your pathetic attempts to drag me into a flame war are noted. Glad to
see you are concerned about the content of the group. The initial post
at the beginning of this thread succinctly illustrates your level of
commitment to a purely intellectual group where a comment about a
newly available *boat* (heaven forbid!) is entirely inappropriate. Why
would I assume that anybody in a boating newsgroup would care if a new
boat line is available? What an error. Apparently, by the standards
evident in this thread, a personal attack message would be far more
appropriate content here. Sorry to have strayed so far from the flock.

Ugly boat. Angular lines, and unless that transom opening closes up, it
might be very interesting in a serious following sea.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes, Harry. The transom folds up when underway. The drop transom
feature looks like an idea that could replace the "swim step" on many
boats, (especially those with a dedicated boat deck) as well as make
boarding easier when tied stern-to. It will be interesting to see one
first hand when the hull is finished.

As far as "ugly" goes, that's in the eye of the beholder. I don't
think it's my all-time favorite style, but it's attractive enough as
far as I'm concerned. Funny thing, my minor objection is that they may
have rounded it a bit too much, while you would seem to prefer
something even less "angular". Different strokes. Being a fan of "work
boat" styling, I like the overall shape. Others won't. I guess that's
one of the reasons there is such a wide variety of boats on the
water. :-)

New line of trawlers, continued
 

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 1, 3:51?am, wrote:
On Jan 31, 10:49 pm, "Chuck Gould" wrote:

The Fathom 40 is a pilothouse style vessel, with traditonal workboat
proportions but somewhat modernized lines.
Very clever - now a guerilla marketing campaign. Pimping to posts he
doesn't like.

You know, you have to wonder how much money is being made here. How
much
is Mr. Gould being paid per post pimping these overpriced, useless
boats?

It's not like it hasn't been done before you know - it's called spam.

Your pathetic attempts to drag me into a flame war are noted. Glad to
see you are concerned about the content of the group. The initial post
at the beginning of this thread succinctly illustrates your level of
commitment to a purely intellectual group where a comment about a
newly available *boat* (heaven forbid!) is entirely inappropriate. Why
would I assume that anybody in a boating newsgroup would care if a new
boat line is available? What an error. Apparently, by the standards
evident in this thread, a personal attack message would be far more
appropriate content here. Sorry to have strayed so far from the flock.


Chuck,
I agree with you, even if the boat is butt ugly, poorly constructed, and
is way over priced, it still encourages a boating discussion about other
trawlers.

I thought your post about the "snake oil" was a great thread, even if I
found you naive in believing that it would possible work.

New line of trawlers, continued
 

Harry Krause wrote:
On 2/1/2007 10:30 AM, Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 1, 3:51?am, wrote:
On Jan 31, 10:49 pm, "Chuck Gould" wrote:

The Fathom 40 is a pilothouse style vessel, with traditonal workboat
proportions but somewhat modernized lines.
Very clever - now a guerilla marketing campaign. Pimping to posts he
doesn't like.

You know, you have to wonder how much money is being made here. How
much
is Mr. Gould being paid per post pimping these overpriced, useless
boats?

It's not like it hasn't been done before you know - it's called spam.

Your pathetic attempts to drag me into a flame war are noted. Glad to
see you are concerned about the content of the group. The initial post
at the beginning of this thread succinctly illustrates your level of
commitment to a purely intellectual group where a comment about a
newly available *boat* (heaven forbid!) is entirely inappropriate. Why
would I assume that anybody in a boating newsgroup would care if a new
boat line is available? What an error. Apparently, by the standards
evident in this thread, a personal attack message would be far more
appropriate content here. Sorry to have strayed so far from the flock.



Ugly boat. Angular lines, and unless that transom opening closes up, it
might be very interesting in a serious following sea.

Which boat do you find "more attractive"? I would assume you prefer a
classic trawler such as a Grand Banks.

New line of trawlers, continued
 

On Feb 1, 8:31?am, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 1, 3:51?am, wrote:
On Jan 31, 10:49 pm, "Chuck Gould" wrote:

The Fathom 40 is a pilothouse style vessel, with traditonal workboat
proportions but somewhat modernized lines.
Very clever - now a guerilla marketing campaign. Pimping to posts he
doesn't like.

You know, you have to wonder how much money is being made here. How
much
is Mr. Gould being paid per post pimping these overpriced, useless
boats?

It's not like it hasn't been done before you know - it's called spam.

Your pathetic attempts to drag me into a flame war are noted. Glad to
see you are concerned about the content of the group. The initial post
at the beginning of this thread succinctly illustrates your level of
commitment to a purely intellectual group where a comment about a
newly available *boat* (heaven forbid!) is entirely inappropriate. Why
would I assume that anybody in a boating newsgroup would care if a new
boat line is available? What an error. Apparently, by the standards
evident in this thread, a personal attack message would be far more
appropriate content here. Sorry to have strayed so far from the flock.

Chuck,
I agree with you, even if the boat is butt ugly, poorly constructed, and
is way over priced, it still encourages a boating discussion about other
trawlers.

I have to assume you're referring to a hyptothetical boat, rather than
the Fathom 40. Ugly is entirely subjective, and we don't know anything
definitive yet about the quality of construction or pricing.




I thought your post about the "snake oil" was a great thread, even if I
found you naive in believing that it would possible work.- Hide quoted text -

A couple of recent developments on that front (without reopening the
thread).
The manufacturer of the specific device I mentioned contacted the
local dealer and said, "By the way, if that Gould character puts
anything about this in a magazine, make sure he doesn't even begin to
imply that we believe our specific device kills microbial growth.
Other companies make that claim, but we don't believe that it's true."
I'm going to delete that paragraph, as it could be read as something
this specific mfgr does believe since I didn't menition any
competitors by name.

The local dealer says he has now spoken to enough current users of the
product that he is convinced it will probably reduce smoking, at a
minimum. He runs a boatyard, and he says he is on a mission to get
this product in the hands of "some of the meanest, toughest, hard
nosed boaters I know with smoking engines", on a money back guarantee
basis, and see if it reduces smoking in any, many, most, or all cases.
His real world test will be testing the effectiveness of the concept
itself, as there is no "additive" asociated with this specific product
to alter the chemistry of the fuel.

The bumblebee. You probably know that it's "aerodynamically
impossible" for a bumblebee to fly, yet we see them flying all the
time. :-)

New line of trawlers, continued
 

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 1, 8:31?am, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 1, 3:51?am, wrote:
On Jan 31, 10:49 pm, "Chuck Gould" wrote:
The Fathom 40 is a pilothouse style vessel, with traditonal workboat
proportions but somewhat modernized lines.
Very clever - now a guerilla marketing campaign. Pimping to posts he
doesn't like.
You know, you have to wonder how much money is being made here. How
much
is Mr. Gould being paid per post pimping these overpriced, useless
boats?
It's not like it hasn't been done before you know - it's called spam.
Your pathetic attempts to drag me into a flame war are noted. Glad to
see you are concerned about the content of the group. The initial post
at the beginning of this thread succinctly illustrates your level of
commitment to a purely intellectual group where a comment about a
newly available *boat* (heaven forbid!) is entirely inappropriate. Why
would I assume that anybody in a boating newsgroup would care if a new
boat line is available? What an error. Apparently, by the standards
evident in this thread, a personal attack message would be far more
appropriate content here. Sorry to have strayed so far from the flock.
Chuck,
I agree with you, even if the boat is butt ugly, poorly constructed, and
is way over priced, it still encourages a boating discussion about other
trawlers.

I have to assume you're referring to a hyptothetical boat, rather than
the Fathom 40. Ugly is entirely subjective, and we don't know anything
definitive yet about the quality of construction or pricing.



I thought your post about the "snake oil" was a great thread, even if I
found you naive in believing that it would possible work.- Hide quoted text -

A couple of recent developments on that front (without reopening the
thread).
The manufacturer of the specific device I mentioned contacted the
local dealer and said, "By the way, if that Gould character puts
anything about this in a magazine, make sure he doesn't even begin to
imply that we believe our specific device kills microbial growth.
Other companies make that claim, but we don't believe that it's true."
I'm going to delete that paragraph, as it could be read as something
this specific mfgr does believe since I didn't menition any
competitors by name.

The local dealer says he has now spoken to enough current users of the
product that he is convinced it will probably reduce smoking, at a
minimum. He runs a boatyard, and he says he is on a mission to get
this product in the hands of "some of the meanest, toughest, hard
nosed boaters I know with smoking engines", on a money back guarantee
basis, and see if it reduces smoking in any, many, most, or all cases.
His real world test will be testing the effectiveness of the concept
itself, as there is no "additive" asociated with this specific product
to alter the chemistry of the fuel.

The bumblebee. You probably know that it's "aerodynamically
impossible" for a bumblebee to fly, yet we see them flying all the
time. :-)

I was definitely talking about a hypothetical boat. I have no idea what
the construction or cost on Fathom is. My point was even if the boat is
a piece of ****, it can still make for a nice thread.

As far as the magnet, it seems that the dealer is selling the concept it
will reduce visible smoke emissions. It would make for an interesting
follow up article to interview those who tested it on their smoking
stink pots.

New line of trawlers, built in Pacific NW, about to debut
 

On 1 Feb 2007 07:43:39 -0800, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:

On Feb 1, 4:03?am, JLH wrote:
On 1 Feb 2007 03:44:36 -0800, wrote:

On Jan 31, 10:47 pm, "Chuck Gould" wrote:
Watch for a new line of trawlers, built in Washington State, by a
company called Fathom Yachts. Their first boat, a 40-footer, will be
coming down the way within about a month. The drawings, model, and
spec look promising. (Many of the founding members of this firm once
worked at a well-known tug builder.)

Not satisfied with pimping phantom diesel fuel enhancement devices
under
the guise of intellectual curiosity, Chuck is now pimping another new
over-priced
trawler that nobody cares about in this group except for Chuck.

Go post it in rec.boats.cruising loser.

Hey Chuck, is it this style -http://tinyurl.com/22xy74? Maybe you could
post a url to a picture if it isn't. Sounds cool.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."


Here's a link:

http://www.gregmarshalldesign.com/te....php?boa_id=42


The interesting thing about the images on that page is that they
feature a boat that didn't exist when the images were created. They
are still completing hull #1. What you see on the web page is the
result of taking the naval architect's drawing and using a computer to
superimpose it on a background. Take a careful look and you will see
that she doesn't sit her lines just exactly right in the photos, but
that's because the boat wasn't really in the picture when it was
taken.

Thanks for the clarification. I *thought* it looked very 'top heavy'.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

New line of trawlers, continued
 

On 1 Feb 2007 09:18:44 -0800, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:

He runs a boatyard, and he says he is on a mission to get
this product in the hands of "some of the meanest, toughest, hard
nosed boaters I know with smoking engines", on a money back guarantee
basis, and see if it reduces smoking in any, many, most, or all cases.

A diesel engine that smokes needs to be serviced. Something is wrong
when that happens unless it's a temporary condition while
accelerating.

New line of trawlers, continued
 

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On 1 Feb 2007 09:18:44 -0800, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:

He runs a boatyard, and he says he is on a mission to get
this product in the hands of "some of the meanest, toughest, hard
nosed boaters I know with smoking engines", on a money back guarantee
basis, and see if it reduces smoking in any, many, most, or all cases.

A diesel engine that smokes needs to be serviced. Something is wrong
when that happens unless it's a temporary condition while
accelerating.


Mine smoke when cold, especially in cold weather. (Volvos). Frankly, I
don't think I've ever seen a diesel that doesn't smoke a little when cold.
Once they warm up the smoke goes away. It's done that since new. Of
course, we don't have the luxury of having the boat sit in 80 degree water
up here.

The GB smokes more when cold and takes longer to clear. With over 6000 hrs
on the little Ford- Lehman, I can cut it some slack.

Eisboch