View Full Version : My design conundrum
Bruce Peckett
31-03-2010, 06:55 PM
The background ... nearly 30 years of inland boating behind us, prior to that a youth spent sailing dinghies. Now we want to sail again.
Intended use ...
We live about as far from the briny as it's possible to get in the UK so the boat will spend much of its time on a mooring at either Grafham Water or Rutland Water (both extremely large man made reservoirs within half an hours drive which have swinging moorings for small-ish cruising boats). This will enable us to pop down the road for a days sailing most weekends without too much hassle.
Once or twice a year the boat will go on a road trailer and be towed to a coastal location in the UK or Europe for trips of one to two weeks in duration. Thus it must be a capable coastal sailer (meeting RCD Cat.C Inshore at least although I'd prefer Cat.B Offshore stability) with room enough for two to four people to squeeze aboard for days at a time (albeit with frequent shore contact so space for stores is not a major issue).
As the boat will be towed only a few times a year, it can push the limits of towing as far as dimensions and dry weight are concerned. As a long time Landrover enthusiast and occasional HGV driver I've no worries about a big heavy tow. Rigging the boat on and off the trailer can take longer than would be acceptable if the boat had to be rigged every time it was sailed. It matters not, in this scenario, if it takes anything up to half a day to launch and/or recover the boat as this will only be done at the start and end of an extended cruise.
Fixed criteria ...
Max. dimensions etc. are ...
23' length on deck (7m)
7' beam (7'6" at a pinch)
2400kg dry weight
23' x 7' is the maximum size of trailer allowed under UK law. Although overhangs are allowed (so strictly about 26' x 9' would be the absolute max) I'm not keen on overhanging loads on trailers. The beam is, in any case, constrained by the narrow access down the side of our house to our back yard. If I absolutely savage the neighbours bloody Leylandii hedge (a bone of contention for many years) I might with care just about squeeze an 8' beam boat down there but I'm not confident and in any case the Leylandii does not respond well to such treatment and would for ever more look bloody awful from our side. The space in the yard for building the boat is wider but not a lot wider and the extra foot would make it tight so realistically, 7' is the target.
A 3 tonne boat trailer weights in at 600kg giving a load capacity of 2.4t. 3t is the max practical tow behind a Landy or a big 4x4 pickup (either of which I have access to as and when required). Not an easy tow I grant you but do-able.
So that gives the max dry weight figure and allowing for two crew and a moderate amount of crew kit and disallowing stripping lots of gear off the boat the light boat displacement needs to be no more than 2.7t (although it could go higher if provision is included for water ballast) and the boat must handle up to another 300kg of crew and gear giving a heavy displacement in the region of 3t
Accommodation below decks ...
Sleeping and sitting space for up to four crew with the sleeping in two separate compartments.
A separate heads accessible from both sleeping spaces without getting people out of bed etc. is an absolute must.
Basic cooking facilities (a two burner and grill camping stove for example) are all that will be required. A built in sink would be a bonus, preferably with a drop down top to double up as a chart table.
Sitting headroom is all that's desired.
On deck ...
A roomy cockpit comfortable enough for four and just about big enough for up to six when day sailing. Must be self draining when the boat is in an upright condition (acceptable if it doesn't entirely self drain when heeled) as the boat will spend several months a year on a swinging mooring and cockpit covers always leak!
Side decks wide enough to make trips forward to the mast and bows practicable for the less than athletic middle aged old fart (brain thinks I'm still 20, birth certificate sez I'm heading rapidly for 50, the body thinks it's nearer 70!)
Rig ...
Definitely gaff cutter, no question on that. I'd like the option to play with all the kites - main topsail, topsail jib, yankees, ghosters, etc. when the mood is right.
A proper fidded topmast setup appeals. It keeps the spar length down within the length of the boat for towing purposes whilst providing the means to hang out all sorts of interesting bits of canvas. Likewise, a reefing bowsprit of traditional style fits in with the scheme.
Aesthetically, a near flush decked appearance is what pops my cork although a true flush deck is not on in this size of boat. Overall, think slightly scaled down East Coast fishing smack converted for leisure sailing and you won't be far off the mark.
Motive power will mostly be the sails but an engine is obviously a must for a serious cruising boat. I'm leaning towards a single cylinder diesel (i.e. Yanmar 1GM10) rather than an outboard. A key factor is the capacity of such an engine to charge batteries as in this modern world, even though I'll happily use wick lamps for lighting and what have you, it's inevitable that there will be a range of electronic devices that need power or charging etc.
I'm a pretty fair carpenter and time served engineer so construction needn't be geared towards the absolute beginner. Clinker ply or strip planking or a combination of ply and strip planking (current thought - ply upper and bottom panels with a strip planked variable radius bilge) over ply bulkheads and stringers
Now for possible boats ...
Ian Oughtreds' Eun Na Mara is quite the most delightful looking boat I think I've ever seen. Sadly, way too small though.
Roger Dongrays' Golant Gaffer is another strong contender. Lacking in berths for our purposes but edges Penguin (below) on the style front.
John Welsford's Penguin ticks very nearly every major box. Below decks it is, in my 'umble, a work of sheer genius. I like the chunky looks although I will admit that I find the coachroof looks a bit odd for reasons I can't quite pin down.
On the downside, Penguin is too beamy at 8' and I doubt whether the cunning accommodation plan would survive the loss of a foot of internal width. The cockpit is perhaps a little small compared to my ideal and the outboard well will intrude into what space there is. I don't think the design would be suitable for an inboard diesel.
Despite these reservations, I think I'd probably be ordering a set of Penguin plans PDQ if it wasn't for the beam issue. I'd probably also have a conversation with the great man himself about stretching the hull by a foot or two to increase cockpit space (accepting an increase in displacement) and also about a cutter rig option.
But that beam is a bit of a show stopper.
There are lots of other designs that come close but nothing that quite hits the spot. If we had the space to build bigger and lived on the coast I'd love to build a Sundowner for example. That's a lovely design.
So I'm left with a conundrum ... do I compromise on at least one if not more critical criteria (which has the very real potential to cause major problems during the build and/or adversely impact on our enjoyment of the finished boat) or do I go for a custom design?
And if the latter, do I risk designing the boat myself or commission an established designer to design it for me?
Now as I've mentioned elsewhere, I'm a trained draughtsman and engineer so the idea of designing the boat myself does have its appeal. However, whilst I'm confident that it wouldn't be a total disaster (in that it would float the right way up!) with no previous experience to draw on it is unlikely that I could, unless I struck lucky, do as good as job as an experienced chap.
The other side of the coin is financial. Being sort of semi-retired at an early age with no pension to speak of I'm not awash with spare cash. I can, I think, scrape together enough to build the boat over a period of two to three years (i.e. during the course of the build) and we can afford to run it thereafter but add on top the cost of commissioning a custom one off design and the piggy bank probably couldn't cope!
To whet your appetite (and mine) here's a montage of stretched tweaked and twiddled bitmap images from various sources that I created to get a feel for the look of the beast ...
647 648
The lines plan is still in development - there is some unfairness still present in the diagonals and a kink in the curve of areas (which has me scratching my head a bit at the moment as I can't see what's causing it - I'll track the little blighter down in the end though!!!)
Intended construction is plywood panel upper works and bottom panel with horizontal strip planking (or possibly vertical plywood strip construction) in the area of the variable radius chine. This, I think, gives a fairly close approximation of the traditional fishing smack hull shape without the time and expense of strip planking the entire hull.
I'm not 100% happy with the counter stern as yet either. As drawn it would be quite easy to construct as it's simply the hull shape carried on up out of the water. However, that's not how smacks were constructed at all! Whether it's a close enough approximation or whether a more complex structure will need to be designed I am, as yet, undecided.
The hull planking would be over ply bulkheads and stringers with the interior fitout (bunk fronts etc.) forming a classic "eggbox" structure within the hull for strength and stiffness.
The interior layout would, perforce, be very much along the lines of boats from the 50's and 60's such as the Kingfisher 20 (http://www.kyoa.org.uk/k20+technical.htm (http://www.kyoa.org.uk/k20+technical.htm)) - in those days narrow beam and compact layouts accommodating a lot in a small space were the norm. In fact, the K20+ is a boat which may have a bearing on whether Betty Anne ever sees the light of day as anything other than an academic exercise since, aesthetics aside, it's a design that ticks all our must have boxes and good examples can be bought for around £3k to £4k. It's pretty hard to resist the idea of getting afloat again within the year as opposed to several years and maybe 4 or 5 times the cost to build from scratch.
That said, I really really want something more visually appealing and challenging to sail so perhaps we'll acquire a K20 as a stop gap and spend the winters (weather permitting) building our dream boat which could well be a Penguin or a Lady Emma (I think I mentioned that the initial drawings of that design look interesting). Maybe Betty Anne will see the light of day, maybe one of the established designers will be inspired by my idea and design something along those lines! I've got some thoughts on a much lighter displacement version of the concept that I'll be playing around with at some point as well.
The Kingfisher does prove one thing though - it is possible to get four berths, a separate WC compartment, a hanging locker and a usable basic galley into a boat measuring less than 22' x 7'! It takes some lateral thinking (I'd never, for example, have thought of putting the galley sink in the top step of the companionway access but doing so solves several problems) but it can be done. :)
For the curious ... the hull and sailplan are off the lines of Betty CK145 an Aldous of Brightlingsea fishing smack. The lines are scaled down to 23' l.o.d. at which the beam comes out at very nearly spot on 7'. However, the depth of the scaled down hull has been increased both above and below the waterline (by about 10% and 25% respectively) as otherwise the freeboard would be ludicrously low and the draft far too shallow (not to mention room only for a small child to sit down below decks!)
The layout is a Penguin style forecabin, the heads and hanging locker from, of all things, a Westerly Nomad and the saloon and galley layout is based on the Golant Gaffer. The cockpit is also from the Golant Gaffer but extended by a foot or so. (Apologies to the respective designers for any offence - none is intended, this graphic is purely a sketch up to get a feel for my ideal boat and nothing more than that)
All the best
Bru
Without delving too deep into your conundrum, Bruce, I found an interesting website here (http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/vehicles/vssafety/requirementsfortrailers), which inter alia states as follows:
Dimensions
If the towing vehicle has a permissible gross weight in excess of 3.5 tonnes the maximum width and length of the trailer are 2.55 metres and 12 metres respectively. If however the gross weight of the towing vehicle is 3.5 tonnes or less then the maximum permissible width and length are 2.3 metres and 7 metres respectively. In both cases the overall length of the towing vehicle and trailer must not exceed either 18m or 18.75m depending on the type of towing vehicle.
A small point, I know, but I would guess you are quoting the figures with respect to a towing vehicle below 3.5 tonnes. Others may have available a heavier vehicle with a greater max GTW, in which case UK law actually permits a lengthier and wider trailer. Important for those wanting to tow a boat longer than 23 feet.
Just another small point. Have you considered hiring in a mobile crane to lift your boat out after you've built her? It's a relatively light weight design and should be no problem if access is available for the lift and swing overhead.
As a perk, you could take some amazing photos as the job was under way.
Oh, and if you want to upload a large image, first limit its maximum dimension to 1500 pixels. You will end up with a thumbnail which, when clicked on, will enlarge to 1500 pixels, then shrink to fit the page. You then take your cursor off the image and back over it and click again to keep it at 1500 while you inspect the detail.
Regards
Bruce Peckett
31-03-2010, 08:53 PM
Just another small point. Have you considered hiring in a mobile crane to lift your boat out after you've built her? It's a relatively light weight design and should be no problem if access is available for the lift and swing overhead.
As a perk, you could take some amazing photos as the job was under way.
Regards
Well I might have considered it until I spent a happy half hour giggling at your damn it moments photo collection and saw the piccy of the toppled over crane and what it had done to the roof of the house!!!!
It would be a viable one off solution sure but I really want to be able to bring the boat back home and park it in the yard over winter as I can then carry out annual maintenance at my leisure and save the extra cost of storage ashore
cheers
Bru
That being the case, Bruce, I regret to say I find it difficult to imagine a cruiser with the specs you want (interior wise) and 23 feet long but only 7 feet wide.
Have you thought about the height of the boat being less than the beam? In which case, you could rig some sort of mobile device that could carry the hull on its side through the gap you have available and then roll it upright once through.
I've had a quick look at my Penguin plans and my guess is that her height at the cabin aft bulkhead is roughly 6 feet. That ought to solve the problem. You can have a full sized Penguin, provided you roll her through 90 degrees just until you get her through that gap at the side of your house.
Bruce Peckett
31-03-2010, 09:23 PM
Without delving too deep into your conundrum, Bruce,
Delve away, delve away!!!
I found an interesting website here (http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/vehicles/vssafety/requirementsfortrailers), which inter alia states as follows:
Dimensions
If the towing vehicle has a permissible gross weight in excess of 3.5 tonnes the maximum width and length of the trailer are 2.55 metres and 12 metres respectively. If however the gross weight of the towing vehicle is 3.5 tonnes or less then the maximum permissible width and length are 2.3 metres and 7 metres respectively. In both cases the overall length of the towing vehicle and trailer must not exceed either 18m or 18.75m depending on the type of towing vehicle.
A small point, I know, but I would guess you are quoting the figures with respect to a towing vehicle below 3.5 tonnes. Others may have available a heavier vehicle with a greater max GTW, in which case UK law actually permits a lengthier and wider trailer. Important for those wanting to tow a boat longer than 23 feet.
Not a small point at all, quite an important one I think. You're spot on, I was assuming from the off a gross vehicle weight under 3.5t as even a Landrover 110 Defender has a GVM of only 3050kg. Beyond that and we're into LGV (Large Goods Vehicle) territory (not quite the same thing as HGV or Heavy Goods Vehicle - don't ask, it's complicated!) and that poses all sorts of complex issues involving vehicle operating licences, driver licensing etc. and so on.
You also run into the issue of braking systems as the max trailer gross for overrun brakes is 3500kg above which you need power (usually air these days) brakes on the trailer linked in to the towing vehicle braking system
So for practical purposes in our context, the absolute outside limits are ...
3500kg gross trailer weight (load capacity around 2.8t)
trailer max length 7m (not including A-frame)
trailer max width 2.3m
However the load can overhang the trailer by up to 305mm on either side and by up to 2m at the rear. Added to which, if the stem is raked, the stem could project forward over the A-frame a bit (although care would need to be taken here that it doesn't project forward enough to make contact with the tow vehicle when the overun braking system is fully compressed)
So the absolute max boat dimensions for a boat towable without a specialist setup would work out to ...
Length: 9m+ (29'6")
Beam: 2.9m (9'6")
Dry Weight: 2.8t
However ... 2.9m is right on the edge of being a wide load - any wider and advance notice to police and an escort vehicle would be required! I've transported construction plant on the back of a lorry at those sort of widths and it ain't no fun at all. (Hmm, probably should have mentioned by now that one of my various nefarious short lived careers, I've had quite a few, was driving trucks for a plant hire company).
Ditto length, a 2m overhang making a 9m tow altogether is going to be a beast of a b*st*rd thing to tow.
The same thing applies on towing weight. Taking it to the absolute nth limit is pushing it and it makes better sense to step down a bit
So I'd say, empirically, that around 26' length and 8' beam with a dry weight of 2.4t is about the practicable limit.
Even then, that is not a tow for the faint hearted. Even behind a Landrover 110 it would be all too easy for the tail to wag the dog.
Cheers
Bru
Bruce Peckett
31-03-2010, 09:32 PM
I've had a quick look at my Penguin plans and my guess is that her height at the cabin aft bulkhead is roughly 6 feet. That ought to solve the problem. You can have a full sized Penguin, provided you roll her through 90 degrees just until you get her through that gap at the side of your house.
Now that is a cunning idea! Why the heck didn;t I think of that myself????? :-)
OK, so it would preclude easily parking the boat up behind the house for the winter but that's not a complete show stopper - there's space on the drive out front (although there's a legal niggle on that as we're technically not allowed to park anything, including cars, in front of the house but then everybody on our street does!) but it would suffice for maintenance purposes if not for the whole winter.
It certainly puts Penguin right back in the frame as I rather think you're right about it being a near impossibility to cram the below decks accomodation we want into something much narrower. Not that I'm quite ready to give up on that just yet even if in the end the design I'm sketching up myself ends up as nothing more than an academic excercise.
Cheers
Bru
Lateral thinking is a pre-requisite for a good pilot, Bruce. :)
I have envisaged precisely the same problem at my place. Most cruisers are beamier than they are high, so it makes sense to think about rolling 90 degrees.
A friend of mine in the US has just turned his Penguin over. He tells me it was a piece of cake. All he did was attach some pullies to the garage roof beams, fix to temporary fittings at the bow and transom, then he and his son just gently lifted her off the building frame and rolled her over.
Thus, you could perhaps build a structure a little longer than your boat with A-frames at each end and suitable wheels. The rest should be easy, provided you have a relatively smooth surface on which to push the whole thing through that gap of which you speak. A couple of concrete strips at the same width as the wheels would suffice. And Bob's your uncle.
Do your winter maintenance where you built her, then reverse the process back out onto the front of your house and you are away to that mooring nearby on the lakes.
Incidentally, if you wait a bit, you may find that there is a new design in the offing which would perhaps suit your plan a little better without breaking the bank. She's called the 'Lady Emma' (http://backyardboatbuilding.org.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=295&highlight=Lady+Emma). Should tick most of your boxes, Bruce, so click on the link and take a peep. Not yet available but may be soon if I know JW.
Bruce Peckett
03-04-2010, 10:54 AM
Mike has very kindly swapped the small graphic in my original post for a larger one and added an image on the lines plan I've drawn up for the hull. Thanks mate
Cheers
Bru
Philip
03-04-2010, 12:08 PM
bruce been reading this thread thought l would do some input l know l my boat isnt a sailing boat but the dimensions are the same as you require . she was towed by a landcruiser on a 4wheel braked trailer to my mooring . slipped into the water and could be winched out . she is in my workshop been worked on , make DIXONS OF EXETER length 22ft6 , beam 7ft 6 , draft 2ft6 , wt 3 1/4 ton maghony on oak .. might give you some ideas! atb phil
Absolutely no problem at all, Bru, me old China. Your problem, as it turns out, was that you were uploading a portable network graphics (PNG) file. These are so rarely used these days by we amateurs that the software was never configured to handle anything like the size you wanted to show. I simply altered the images to JPEGs and - voila!
Smashing images, btw, but do you have the software to convert the dimensions you are using into workable drawings for frames and other bits and bobs? If you do, I can imagine you might have a rather nice boat in the design phase.
I'm still inclined to feel, however, that a 23 footer should have a bit more beam on her if you want to make her into a comfortable cruiser with your wants incorporated. I could be wrong, of course, and look forward to hearing what your lateral thinking might achieve.
From my own experience, I can confidently say that you certainly can cram most of your specified wants into a 23' hull. But it needs more width, I feel, to achieve that. It would not help to have such a flush decked design, either. More might be achieved with a bit more cabin height. It would, though, spoil the traditional look of her to some extent. Remember that the truly beautiful boats of yesteryear were equipped in rather Spartan fashion and lacked anything like the list of 'mod cons' most people take for granted these days. Many actually had no such thing as an engine - but the crew really knew how to get the best out of sail.
Anyway, thanks for sharing these images and thoughts with us. Great stuff. Who said you aren't a true backyardie? Wasn't me! You are definitely a backyardie, Bru, just like the rest of us here. We all start out in much the same way.
Kind regards
George Waite
03-04-2010, 02:58 PM
Mike
I would advise strongly against slinging a rope over any roof tuss and lifting from it. The truss and the tension member in particular are only designed to take the roof weight + a snow loading. If you add to that the fact that modern buildings are built down to a price with little or no structural redundancy then you have a recipe for disaster.
Yes, good point George. In fact, the example given above was an under house garage and the 'roof' was actually floor beams to the house above. I guess the same argument might apply.
What I was suggesting was a frame set up on wheels. It could be made as strong as needed, from steel of timber of course. And I stand by that suggestion in that it seemed to me rather self-evident that one would build it strong enough to do the job on a fairly regular basis. Even a Penguin hull at around 2.5 tons ought not to be that big a problem to rotate onto its side for Bruce to get it through to his backyard building area.
Do you have a better solution in mind? Knowing you, another lateral solution is undoubtedly in the offing. And if that is to poison the next door neighbour's Leylandii hedge, I had thought of that one I do assure you but thought it a rather churlish idea. ;) Now, if it was my neighbour to the west, I would not hesitate. He, or his wife, has recently poisoned a lovely creeper that has thrived in our backyard for years. I dunno. Some people, eh? :rolleyes: Guess what; he too has a Leylandii hedge out front, on the streetline. Hmmm .... :devil-smiley-019:
Bruce Peckett
03-04-2010, 04:40 PM
Absolutely no problem at all, Bru, me old China. Your problem, as it turns out, was that you were uploading a portable network graphics (PNG) file. These are so rarely used these days by we amateurs that the software was never configured to handle anything like the size you wanted to show. I simply altered the images to JPEGs and - voila!
Ah so that was the prob then! Actually, PNG format supercedes Jpeg, Gif etc. and is the current recommended image format for web pages (guess who used to run a web design company :)) but it matters not
Smashing images, btw, but do you have the software to convert the dimensions you are using into workable drawings for frames and other bits and bobs? If you do, I can imagine you might have a rather nice boat in the design phase.
Thanks for the compliment. Yup, I've got the means to produce drawings. At this stage of the design I'm using Coreldraw X4 for speed and ease of use but for detailed work in 3 dimensions I've got access to Autocad 2010 although not on my home PC (not at Autodesk's licence fees!) so I'm time limited as I can only use it at a mates office out of hours
I'm still inclined to feel, however, that a 23 footer should have a bit more beam on her if you want to make her into a comfortable cruiser with your wants incorporated. I could be wrong, of course, and look forward to hearing what your lateral thinking might achieve
From my own experience, I can confidently say that you certainly can cram most of your specified wants into a 23' hull. But it needs more width, I feel, to achieve that. It would not help to have such a flush decked design, either. More might be achieved with a bit more cabin height. It would, though, spoil the traditional look of her to some extent. Remember that the truly beautiful boats of yesteryear were equipped in rather Spartan fashion and lacked anything like the list of 'mod cons' most people take for granted these days. Many actually had no such thing as an engine - but the crew really knew how to get the best out of sail..
More beam would definitely help with the internal accomodation. It would also potentially improve initial stability but without altering the underbody shape to compensate it would increase displacement significantly without necessarily adding much of a gain in power (ability to carry sail) as the extra displacement would be lateral rather than coming from increased draft That said, I'm not ruling out the possibility of increasing the beam from 7' to around 7'6" if it proves necessary / desirable and I have a rough version of the hull lines based on a Bawley rather than a Smack which has more sounded soft sections with less cross sectional area and which would suit a beamier hull
The modern design ethos seems to tend towards more beam for a given length than was considered the norm in the 50's and 60's - from my analysis of numeros designs the average 20 to 25 footer designed 40 or 50 years ago was around 7' beam whereas today 8' or so would be considered the norm.
Low headroom is something we're happy to accept as the price of exterior appearance and decent width of side decks etc. To put it another way, the exterior takes priority and the interior is squeezed as best we may :)
We're not big on mod cons as showers, standing headroom, etc. and so on are things we've lived without on and off for many years on the canals - the average narrowboat back cabin is 8'x6'6" with less than 5' of headroom and in that space you get your double bed, table, side bench (/ bed) for seating and your cooking stove!. We've lived in that space for extended periods although we were young and stupid then! The only mod con that is an absolute must is a seperate space for the WC as SWMBO is adamant on this particular point! Other than that, we're talking camping level equipment rather than posh caravan.
That said, the coachroof may get a little more height on it yet rather more to offer better protection for the helmsman and crew in the cockpit than to increase headroom below decks. Once I've got the basic outline of the hull, internal layout and rig sorted out I'll tweak and twiddle and see how things work out aesthetically and practically.
Anyway, thanks for sharing these images and thoughts with us. Great stuff. Who said you aren't a true backyardie? Wasn't me! You are definitely a backyardie, Bru, just like the rest of us here. We all start out in much the same way.
Thanks for the feedback, it's very encouraging. I think it was me who suggested that I'm not a true backyardie ... yet!
ATB
Bru
Bruce Peckett
03-04-2010, 04:47 PM
And if that is to poison the next door neighbour's Leylandii hedge, I had thought of that one I do assure you but thought it a rather churlish idea. ;)
Don't think I haven't been tempted. That bl**dy hedge is a major pain in the backside. Trouble is, they have always been really lovely neighbours in every other respect (sadly, the man of the house passed away earlier this year) so I can't bring myself to do the dastardly deed (copper nails work really well hammered well in apparently!)
Is a Penguin really that heavy by the way? From the data on JW's web site the dry weight is given as 970kg. There's no displacement figure quoted but I'd assume less than 1.5t and, allowing for gear and the weight of the trailer around that figure as an all up towing weight.
Cheers
Bru
Is a Penguin really that heavy by the way?Nowhere near that heavy. :D However, who knows what you might have inside her and just couldn't be bothered removing just to get it past your house? You could perhaps have an inboard engine, for example, which would weigh a bit. Now it might not be wise in that case to roll her over 90 degrees for too long. Likewise, you may have a fuel tank, in which event you may have to empty it or see it run out onto your driveway and stinking the boat out for weeks (if not forever).
All things being equal - and barring an inboard engine - I stand staunchly by my suggestion. It would allow you the possibility of achieving what you want, Bru, with no problems caused by that slightly undersized gap along the side of your house.
There is another solution too: move to somewhere with a bigger side access or no need for one at all. I guess that might become a toss up between the house of your dreams and the boat of your dreams. :rofl:
Regards
Philip
03-04-2010, 06:02 PM
is my post invisible? or have l got the wrong end of the stick?
is my post invisible? or have l got the wrong end of the stick?Hahahaha. :rofl: Phil, I saw it and thought to myself that you had the wrong end of the stick. Of course, I often see posts here I feel that way about and I just sit back and see what happens. In this case, I have no doubt that others have read it and will reply. Don't forget it's a holiday weekend - not that the weatherman seems to have noticed - and a lot of people are out trying to have fun rather than staring at their PC screens. Patience man, patience. He heh! :D
ATB
George Waite
03-04-2010, 07:40 PM
Mike
Curiously enough I have just cut down 2 leylandiwhatsits this morning, bloody things are good for nothing more than windbreaks. The only problem I see with turning a boat on its side is one of transverse stiffness, you have to remember that the small area in touch with the floor is actually taking the full weight of the vessel until you actually take the load on the lifting frame. This could get very complicated. I suggest that Bruce keeps his boat at the front of the house and sod the regulations.
Bruce Peckett
03-04-2010, 09:43 PM
is my post invisible? or have l got the wrong end of the stick?
Yo Philip, I'd somehow missed your post. Must be getting old!
Actually, I reckon that's a mighty fine hull there. Of course, motor boats not being my thing these days I'd have to do a bit of surgery to the cabin and stick a big tall lump of wood on top but it definitely has potential :behindsofa:
But seriously folks, it's yet more proof that the basic dimensions are viable. What's the accomodation like below decks?
ATB
Bru
Bruce Peckett
03-04-2010, 10:01 PM
Mike
Curiously enough I have just cut down 2 leylandiwhatsits this morning, bloody things are good for nothing more than windbreaks..
I'd rather have wind :giggle:
The only problem I see with turning a boat on its side is one of transverse stiffness, you have to remember that the small area in touch with the floor is actually taking the full weight of the vessel until you actually take the load on the lifting frame. This could get very complicated. I suggest that Bruce keeps his boat at the front of the house and sod the regulations.
It's a good point George, it's one thing to roll a boat over during construction but perhaps quite another once she's fully fitted out. Mind it'd be one way of finding all the bl*8dy stuff that had fallen into hidden corners and inaccessible crevices!
Cheers
Bru
The only problem I see with turning a boat on its side is one of transverse stiffness, you have to remember that the small area in touch with the floor is actually taking the full weight of the vessel until you actually take the load on the lifting frame. This could get very complicated.George & Bru
Perhaps I did not make the method clear enough. What my pal in America did was to first lift the boat from its cradle and then roll it like a pig on a spit. That way, there is no problem that I can envisage, given that the boat is being rolled about its axis with the weight being borne by what should theoretically be the strongest parts of the hull, the stem and the transom, with the full weight being distributed throughout the entire hull.
I suggest that Bruce keeps his boat at the front of the house and sod the regulations.I might have suggested the same thing until recently. There is always some petty and ignorant busybody out there who will dob you in, especially when their primary motivation is envy. I mean, what right do you have to own a bloody boat, right?
Long before I was arrested over this trifling neighbour incident, I had been investigated on three separate occasions on falsely laid allegations of benefit fraud. One of my accusers, a council employee (and ex copper, btw) came to my home in relation to a building safety matter and then went back to town to file a report that included a fraud allegation based upon the fact that, because I was a pilot and had an Australian accent, I must therefore have flown for Qantas and retired with a huge pension. This, he averred, must have been hidden away and not disclosed, thus I was, in his warped mind, a benefit cheat. It never occurred to his tiny mind that I had never worked for Qantas at all and was not, in fact, an Australian but a Brit born in London in 1947 of Brit Londoners.
My advice, then, is not to ignore the law but to find a way around your problem.
Best wishes
George Waite
03-04-2010, 11:06 PM
Mike
You mean he thought Australia only had one airline?
George
Apparently so, George. And, like so many others out there, he wrongly believed that all airline pilots are loaded.
I have a cousin who worked his whole life for BA. Started when it was BOAC as a First Officer on VC10s. Thirteen years later, and while he was still a First Officer, the VC10 was retired from airline service (I think BOAC's fleet was mothballed and eventually handed over to the RAF for conversion to military transports and mid-air refuelling tankers). The BOAC crews were given four years fully paid leave. He went back into BA with a command training course on the Boeing 747. Now, he was, and is, loaded.
Very few pilots other than those with similar backgrounds to him ever retire loaded like he is. It's about time the British public realised that the vast majority of airline pilots in this day and age earn little more, and sometimes much less, than your average train driver. It doesn't surprise me that Joe Public believe pilots are all loaded. It DID surprise me that a former police officer would be so bloody stupid as to make such allegations without ensuring he had some facts under his belt rather than relying on complete fantasy based on nothing more than his overactive and defective imagination.
Since then I have come to understand that police officers simply ain't like they used to be. In fact, very few professions are much like they used to be. And it is just me who is living somewhere in a bygone era when one could believe in and trust our government institutions.
Enough on that off topic subject now. I am depressing myself as I write.
Besides, I have a couple of wonderful photos to upload to the site, don't I George? And distractions like this thread are keeping me from doing that. :D
Philip
04-04-2010, 10:22 AM
Yo Philip, I'd somehow missed your post. Must be getting old!
Actually, I reckon that's a mighty fine hull there. Of course, motor boats not being my thing these days I'd have to do a bit of surgery to the cabin and stick a big tall lump of wood on top but it definitely has potential :behindsofa:
But seriously folks, it's yet more proof that the basic dimensions are viable. What's the accomodation like below decks?
ATB
Bru
bruce m8! ah! l didnt get it wrong! the reason l posted was to show even if you make the cabin higher , l think you will struggle to get the accomadtion you want , expand the beam and then you are talking . my brother in law has a fjord 24ft but the beam is 10ft , inside it feels massive!! the cabin in mine is 2berth and 1 head its small with only 5ft headspace. Its the beam bruce makes all the differeance, the design you were looking at is long keeled which you can trailer IF the trailer is set for it . You could use extended bilge keels as well for sailing purposes , l mean we are not talking racing sailor , just for crusing .... atb phil
:iagree: My sentiments exactly, Phil. Like I said, I really think Bru needs to stick with a wider beam and resolve the gap twixt his house and them pesky leylandii trees.
I am seriously attracted to Bru's copper nail solution, which I have checked out on the Web. One suggestion is to carefully peel the bark back, hammer in the copper nails, and then put the bark back down over it. The problem is it could take two years to kill 'em! :rofl:
Still think he would be better to build a rolling rig. It would be handy to have that during the build itself too. ;)
Philip
04-04-2010, 02:17 PM
:iagree: My sentiments exactly, Phil. Like I said, I really think Bru needs to stick with a wider beam and resolve the gap twixt his house and them pesky leylandii trees.
I am seriously attracted to Bru's copper nail solution, which I have checked out on the Web. One suggestion is to carefully peel the bark back, hammer in the copper nails, and then put the bark back down over it. The problem is it could take two years to kill 'em! :rofl:
Still think he would be better to build a rolling rig. It would be handy to have that during the build itself too. ;)
there is quicker ways to kill them , either soak the ground at the base with deisel died within 3mths , ring the bark at base , or drill small holes at base and inject roundup ! all work fairly quickly . going back to boat design , higher the cabin , she will be top heavy at that beam design , and a very long keel would be required to counterbalance the extra height! atb phil
Ben Slusher
07-04-2010, 03:50 PM
Your original design drawing looks a little like a Black Swan from Selway Fisher. With its various keel options and build techniques it might fit your needs.
:iagree: with Ben - and here's a link to the relevant page (http://www.selway-fisher.com/Yacht2024.htm#LACK) on Paul Fisher's website.
Bruce Peckett
07-04-2010, 08:00 PM
I'd looked at the Black Swan. It's close but at 8'4" beam it really busts the balloon and I'm not overly keen on the shape of the transom.
However, the Beaumaris 24 http://www.selway-fisher.com/Yacht2024.htm#BEAU (http://www.selway-fisher.com/Yacht2024.htm#BEAU) on the other hand with a bit of rearrangement below decks might just be exactly what I've been looking for. LoD is in range at 23'6", beam is 7'6" which is fine, she's sub 1500kg dry which also hits the nail on the head and the plans offer a side deck option as well as the depicted cabin out to the hull sides.
In fact, the only thing missing is a seperate WC compartment and I don't think it'd be beyond the wit of man to alter the accomodation plan to suit
So close is it to what I've been looking for that I'm about to order the study plans for a closer look!
Cheers
Bru
George Waite
07-04-2010, 08:57 PM
Mike
I like Mr Fishers Yamato.
George
Not an entirely fair comparison when you make the leap from your specs here to Paul Fisher's Beaumaris. I say this because there is a considerable difference in the build costs and LOA, though I can see why you are attracted by Beaumaris's width, Bru. ;)
Jeannette and I looked at Beaumaris ourselves some time ago. It's a sweet looking boat and truly roomy, though not quite so roomy if you build her with side decks, of course. Personally, I prefer side decks. The thought of having to clamber over the cabin roof to get to the sharp end - or get through the cabin and clamber out of a forward hatch - does not appeal to me unless I am trying to avoid drowning.
As I said from the outset on this thread, choosing a design to build is very much a personal thing, Bru, and it is always difficult to propose designs to others.
May I suggest you should go with your own instincts, Bru, and take no notice of what the rest of us have to say? It's your build and will eventually be your boat. And whatever design you choose, you can be sure we are all right behind you to help in any way we can. :kiss:
Best wishes
George
So do I, mate. I can imagine you building one - or even designing something similar yourself. :approval:
May I politely remind you that I was very keen at one time to build a Paul Fisher design? I reckon he is the equal of any other designer in the world - and way better than most - particularly in the backard boatbuilding world. He is also rather a nice chap.
Bruce Peckett
07-04-2010, 09:25 PM
Not an entirely fair comparison when you make the leap from your specs here to Paul Fisher's Beaumaris. I say this because there is a considerable difference in the build costs and LOA, though I can see why you are attracted by Beaumaris's width, Bru. ;)Who said life was fair? :p
OK, so it's lacking a seperate WC and is rather lighter in the displacement than I'd proposed but otherwise is it so very different?
Jeannette and I looked at Beaumaris ourselves some time ago. It's a sweet looking boat and truly roomy, though not quite so roomy if you build her with side decks, of course. Personally, I prefer side decks. The thought of having to clamber over the cabin roof to get to the sharp end - or get through the cabin and clamber out of a forward hatch - does not appeal to me unless I am trying to avoid drowning. Me neither! I'm not as agile as I once was and not getting any younger either!
As I said from the outset on this thread, choosing a design to build is very much a personal thing, Bru, and it is always difficult to propose designs to others. May I suggest you should go with your own instincts, Bru, and take no notice of what the rest of us have to say? It's your build and will eventually be your boat. And whatever design you choose, you can be sure we are all right behind you to help in any way we can. :kiss:Weeeelllll, I'll go my own way in the end of course but the input and opinions from/of others is valuable and only a fool ignores sound advice from experienced people. Of course, I'm a well known fool!!!!
What may put a sizeable spanner in the works, albeit potentially in a good way, is that my good lady has today been asked if she'd be interested in relocating to Bridgwater in Somerset (probably in 2011). It's an area we know quite well as we've spent several holidays in the area in the past and I've got a very good friend who lived down that way until recently.
A move to within a stones throw of the coast could significantly affect the crtieria so until we know more we're gonna have to hold off on any hard decisions.
My thinking, either way, is now along the lines of finding the nearest "off the shelf" design to what I want and adapting the accomodation etc. to suit our requirements if necessary. That's an example of heeding good advice as it's what Mike has advocated in this very thread and I think it's wise words!
Cheers
Bru
OK, so it's lacking a seperate WC and is rather lighter in the displacement than I'd proposed but otherwise is it so very different?Bru, in my opinion it is considerably different, for example, to JohnW's Penguin. Perhaps not so different to your drawing based on several designs. If you are going to build her using the strip build technique, it will cost a hell of a lot more too.
What may put a sizeable spanner in the works, albeit potentially in a good way, is that my good lady has today been asked if she'd be interested in relocating to Bridgwater in Somerset (probably in 2011). It's an area we know quite well as we've spent several holidays in the area in the past and I've got a very good friend who lived down that way until recently.
A move to within a stones throw of the coast could significantly affect the crtieria so until we know more we're gonna have to hold off on any hard decisions.Well I'll be ... . There goes your side gap problem in one fell swoop. Mind you, living in Bridgwater would take the shine off things for you, Bru. I would strongly recommend you look for a home outside Bridgwater, indeed well outside. It ain't what it used to be, believe me.
You know what, guys 'n gals? Reading back through this fascinating thread, I realize that Bru has been doing here what we all do at the same stage he's at in eventually building a boat. Bouncing around twixt the various things available out there in the way of our dream boat design.
I've likened it to buying a house and it really is in so many ways. We all tend to think we have our needs sorted out in the mind. We sometimes become fixated upon certain things, believing them to be important factors. In Bru's case, there was this gap along the side of his house as a limiting factor. We all reflect upon this and try to offer solutions and then along comes something that offers a final resolution.
This sort of thing has happened to Jeannette and I so many times. We have 'decided' on something and life somehow brings about an unexpected change.
Somewhere in here is a moral. I think it goes something like this: one should always remain flexible in one's boatbuilding plans and be prepared to modify them at a moment's notice if and when things change - for the better or for worse.
As I have said so many times before, choosing a design to build is a personal thing. It can be affected by factors that are not obvious even to the chap or chapess contemplating the designs. In the end, the best a third party can hope for is that the design eventually settled upon makes the relevant builder very happy both in its construction and its eventual use.
Darned fascinating thread, Bru, and one in which I, for one, have enjoyed participating. Good luck with your build, whatever it may be. Please blog it here so that we can all learn things we don't know and get some shared pleasure from your achievement.
Best wishes
Bruce Peckett
08-04-2010, 02:01 PM
Well I just price checked the cost of the WRC strip planking for the Beaumaris 24 and it comes out at £3,300 or so which is certainly not a cheap option compared to a clinker ply or stitch and glue hull. Probably doubles or maybe even trebles the cost of the bare hull. Hmmm.
I hear what you say about Bridgwater Mike. Lots of nice places around and about but the town itself is not the most salubrious place I've ever visited! We'll have to factor that in to the final decision along with it being a depressed employment area - it'll be no good Jane having a job with her employers down there if I can't find anything at all 'cos it's my earnings that'll be needed to pay for a boat!
You've hit the nail, once again, on the head in your latest post Mike. My problem is that I know what I want in terms of style, rig and accomodation and I can't find an off the shelf design that quite hits the mark. There's lots that come fairly close but they all fall down on at least one key criteria, usually two or three!!!!
Cheers
Bru
Well I just price checked the cost of the WRC strip planking for the Beaumaris 24 and it comes out at £3,300 or so which is certainly not a cheap option compared to a clinker ply or stitch and glue hull. Probably doubles or maybe even trebles the cost of the bare hull. Hmmm.Precisely. We looked at that too. It's an interesting way to build a boat, for sure. Especially if you don't mind glassing and working with epoxy on a somewhat grand scale. It's not just the additional cost of WRC but the huge increase in expense in glassing the entire hull, inside and out. You end up with a nicely contoured hull but you sure do pay for that luxury - in spades.
I hear what you say about Bridgwater Mike. Lots of nice places around and about but the town itself is not the most salubrious place I've ever visited! We'll have to factor that in to the final decision along with it being a depressed employment area - it'll be no good Jane having a job with her employers down there if I can't find anything at all 'cos it's my earnings that'll be needed to pay for a boat!I guess it's what you make it to some degree but it becomes a pretty hairy place in the late evenings by all accounts. Bridgwater College is ace and three of my kids and my darling wife have all travelled there to study. It's a high achieving College. The key to going there is to stay out of town. There are some really nice places on or near the coast if you go just a few miles out of town, Bru.
You've hit the nail, once again, on the head in your latest post Mike. My problem is that I know what I want in terms of style, rig and accomodation and I can't find an off the shelf design that quite hits the mark. There's lots that come fairly close but they all fall down on at least one key criteria, usually two or three!!!!Been there and worn that T-shirt, Bru. I suggest you ask yourself what you really need as opposed to what you simply want. We did that and it tends to make life a lot easier. I think perhaps the real problem is that most of us have champagne tastes and a beer income. If you truly want everything that opens and shuts, you may as well look at something used at around 50 to 60 feet - and be prepared to spend a lot of dough long after you've bought the darned thing.
Small can be beautiful. And it doesn't cost a lot to build a nice lapstrake design and go extended 'camping' on board. It's a lot of fun and sure as hell beats living under canvas or in a poxy caravan. ;)
Don't worry, Bru, you will get there in the end. And I like the way you are thinking. The best bit is when you actually start making sawdust. Luverly jubberly!!!
Best wishes
George Waite
10-04-2010, 06:20 PM
Mr Peckett
If you are intending to use your craft in the Bristol Channel then I would suggest that the ability to ride out at least one (very) low tide sat on its ass would be one of your primary design criteria.
Now, now, George. Please be a little kinder about our Channel, mate. Not everyone lives in the most beautiful part of the UK for sailing like some people I know. :D
He's right though, as usual, Bru. Mind you, if the proposed barrier gets built :pig_flying: you might just strike it lucky and have a wonderland for sailing right on your doorstep.
No doubt the NIMBYs will stop that from happening, though. :rolleyes:
Regards
George Waite
11-04-2010, 10:05 AM
Mike
Spent a cold night on Denny island once many years ago after being caught out by the tide in a rowing race against the "Pill Sharks". Never seen an island with a bow wave before that. Where do these bloody NIMBYS think that electricity comes from?
Too right, George. I used to paddle my PBK kayaks out of Clevedon back in my youth. The tides we get here are astonishingly powerful and I've always wondered why our pollies have never had someone suggest building a tidal barrier with hydro-electric power to harness that enormous quantity of water flowing back and forth out there.
Needless to say, when someone suggests it, all the do-gooders out there start complaining that it will adversely affect the environment. I note that a wildfowl trust of some repute reckons it will damage the birds' territory. What utter nonsense some so-called experts speak! My own, admittedly uneducated, opinion is that the birds would do rather well out of a stable pond of huge proportions that would be created by the barrier.
Even if it did cause some disturbance, I believe the benefits of building that barrier would be huge in terms of electricity supply to this nation. No burning of fossil fuels, no nuclear station, just a passive barrier built across a stretch of very muddy water, churning out vast quantities of environmentally friendly energy for the nation.
We need to get our priorities right in this country. Looking after ourselves first instead of interfering with others would be a good place to start.
Regards
Having browsed through this excellent thread again, I would wish to add an important change in legislation that affects legal trailer widths in the UK.
Due to EU law, it seems we are now road legal here in England with a trailer of 2.55 metres width, irrespective of length or weight. This brings us in line with the rest of the EU countries, apparently. This now makes a considerable difference to the size of boat we can build and then tow behind our cars. A most welcome change, if I may say so, and the first occasion upon which I am to some extent thankful to those bureaucratic law makers who sit across the Channel in Brussels. :D
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.10 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.