Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Seekimg a solo tub approach.

Expand Messages
  • george
    Just an aged newby to this group. Had owned 15 and 17 foot standard weight aluminum canoes for many decades and many uses. Now need a much lighter hull for
    Message 1 of 16 , Jan 10, 2013
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment

      Just an aged newby to this group.  Had owned 15 and 17 foot standard weight aluminum canoes for many decades and many uses.  Now need a much lighter hull for use for nearby flat water fishing and flexible cartop to drop-in uses.  Need 300 pound capacity, with modestly high seat (due to reduced flexibility with aging).  Probably of quite modest length.

      Perhaps a stubby hull such as dinks use.  This to improve roll stability.  Due to reduced heading stability, am feeling the use of a double paddle may be useful.  Have previously constructed oars with cupped blades, as a base for producing such paddles.

      Had developed a prenchant for adjustable seating height from canoe uses. The lower position for navigating, with the highter position used after anchoring.  Height change could just be a temporarily added seat riser, inserted when conditions permit or after anchoring.

      Had noted the Airolite style quite some years ago, but I am not very familiar with current design ranges.  Has anyone considered using a dual hulled, cat-style design to gain roll stability at minimal displacements?  Maybe this could use a form suited to a two-off construction approach for the pair of hulls, with the wing between them providing the basic seating position with just one foot positioned within each hull.

      Does anyone have comments, suggestions or a basis for related approaches? 

      Many thanks, George.

       

       

    • Dennis O
      I have never built a complete watercraft of any sort but I have been studying on this forum, books, magazines and other forums for years. If stability is your
      Message 2 of 16 , Jan 10, 2013
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        I have never built a complete watercraft of any sort but I have been studying on this forum, books, magazines and other forums for years. If stability is your concern you do not need to go to such complicated lengths. The solution is simply a wider beam.

        It will be slightly slower but if age is an issue you are slightly slower as well--I'm 62--I understand. I too have had aluminum canoes. Most aluminum canoes get at least some of their stability from width not just weight. Also, it is a matter of inches, some times as little as 4 inches. Go back to the forum (where the real experts_I am not) and ask about widening slightly one of the stock designs (for example 2" on either side of the centerline).

        Widening would be much easier and less bulky than out riggers. A twin hull design would be stable but you are doubling the drag. 2-4" of width at the beam would gain the stability without the great increase in drag.

        One other note--chose something slightly longer because the stringers need to twist from the center to the stems. Extra width will compound the twist. spreading it over greater length will make it easier to build.

        Still, ask the real experts.


        Dennis


        --- On Thu, 1/10/13, george <kf2oc@...> wrote:

        From: george <kf2oc@...>
        Subject: [Airolite_Boats] Seekimg a solo tub approach.
        To: Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Thursday, January 10, 2013, 5:43 AM

         

        Just an aged newby to this group.  Had owned 15 and 17 foot standard weight aluminum canoes for many decades and many uses.  Now need a much lighter hull for use for nearby flat water fishing and flexible cartop to drop-in uses.  Need 300 pound capacity, with modestly high seat (due to reduced flexibility with aging).  Probably of quite modest length.

        Perhaps a stubby hull such as dinks use.  This to improve roll stability.  Due to reduced heading stability, am feeling the use of a double paddle may be useful.  Have previously constructed oars with cupped blades, as a base for producing such paddles.

        Had developed a prenchant for adjustable seating height from canoe uses. The lower position for navigating, with the highter position used after anchoring.  Height change could just be a temporarily added seat riser, inserted when conditions permit or after anchoring.

        Had noted the Airolite style quite some years ago, but I am not very familiar with current design ranges.  Has anyone considered using a dual hulled, cat-style design to gain roll stability at minimal displacements?  Maybe this could use a form suited to a two-off construction approach for the pair of hulls, with the wing between them providing the basic seating position with just one foot positioned within each hull.

        Does anyone have comments, suggestions or a basis for related approaches? 

        Many thanks, George.

         

         

      • Roger L
        I drive an lightweight kevlar canoe. 38 lbs. Seats two, but really made for one. Fast and unstable. We had several near flips and one day we turned over in
        Message 3 of 16 , Jan 10, 2013
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          
          I drive an lightweight kevlar canoe. 38 lbs. Seats two, but really made for one. Fast and unstable. We had several near flips and one day we turned over in some fairly mild water just because we both turned our heads at the same moment to look at a passing boat. So we added klunky outriggers. What a difference! They weigh almost nothing, and the drag is negligible. After all, only one is in the water at any time and it is just skimming.  If you balance perfectly, neither outrigger needs to touch. All in all, the tiny additional drag is more than offset by the fact that I can lean over and really get the paddle in the water when I want to. Now it won't tip no matter what. Assembly time is about a minute. And it is stable enough that we are comfortable where things used to be dicey.
           
          An Airolite would be the perfect application. I love his designs, and think the old boy would approve. After all, he was nothing if not innovative.
           
          It would be easy to make them nicer. BTW, a canoe only needs one beam piece. All the aluminum pieces are 7/8" diam. x 1/16" wall aluminum. Probably tent poles. These outriggers are crap trap floats...2 per side, back to back.. 
          I'll post a picture labeled: "Outriggers".   
             Luck,  Roger L.  
          ----- Original Message -----
          From: Dennis O
          Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 2:36 PM
          Subject: Re: [Airolite_Boats] Seekimg a solo tub approach.

          I have never built a complete watercraft of any sort but I have been studying on this forum, books, magazines and other forums for years. If stability is your concern you do not need to go to such complicated lengths. The solution is simply a wider beam.

          It will be slightly slower but if age is an issue you are slightly slower as well--I'm 62--I understand. I too have had aluminum canoes. Most aluminum canoes get at least some of their stability from width not just weight. Also, it is a matter of inches, some times as little as 4 inches. Go back to the forum (where the real experts_I am not) and ask about widening slightly one of the stock designs (for example 2" on either side of the centerline).

          Widening would be much easier and less bulky than out riggers. A twin hull design would be stable but you are doubling the drag. 2-4" of width at the beam would gain the stability without the great increase in drag.

          One other note--chose something slightly longer because the stringers need to twist from the center to the stems. Extra width will compound the twist. spreading it over greater length will make it easier to build.

          Still, ask the real experts.


          Dennis


          --- On Thu, 1/10/13, george <kf2oc@...> wrote:

          From: george <kf2oc@...>
          Subject: [Airolite_Boats] Seekimg a solo tub approach.
          To: Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com
          Date: Thursday, January 10, 2013, 5:43 AM

           

          Just an aged newby to this group.  Had owned 15 and 17 foot standard weight aluminum canoes for many decades and many uses.  Now need a much lighter hull for use for nearby flat water fishing and flexible cartop to drop-in uses.  Need 300 pound capacity, with modestly high seat (due to reduced flexibility with aging).  Probably of quite modest length.

          Perhaps a stubby hull such as dinks use.  This to improve roll stability.  Due to reduced heading stability, am feeling the use of a double paddle may be useful.  Have previously constructed oars with cupped blades, as a base for producing such paddles.

          Had developed a prenchant for adjustable seating height from canoe uses. The lower position for navigating, with the highter position used after anchoring.  Height change could just be a temporarily added seat riser, inserted when conditions permit or after anchoring.

          Had noted the Airolite style quite some years ago, but I am not very familiar with current design ranges.  Has anyone considered using a dual hulled, cat-style design to gain roll stability at minimal displacements?  Maybe this could use a form suited to a two-off construction approach for the pair of hulls, with the wing between them providing the basic seating position with just one foot positioned within each hull.

          Does anyone have comments, suggestions or a basis for related approaches? 

          Many thanks, George.

           

           

        • Marianne Guidos
          mrkfortney@gmail.com
          Message 4 of 16 , Jan 12, 2013
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment


            On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Roger L <rogerlov@...> wrote:
             

            I drive an lightweight kevlar canoe. 38 lbs. Seats two, but really made for one. Fast and unstable. We had several near flips and one day we turned over in some fairly mild water just because we both turned our heads at the same moment to look at a passing boat. So we added klunky outriggers. What a difference! They weigh almost nothing, and the drag is negligible. After all, only one is in the water at any time and it is just skimming.  If you balance perfectly, neither outrigger needs to touch. All in all, the tiny additional drag is more than offset by the fact that I can lean over and really get the paddle in the water when I want to. Now it won't tip no matter what. Assembly time is about a minute. And it is stable enough that we are comfortable where things used to be dicey.
             
            An Airolite would be the perfect application. I love his designs, and think the old boy would approve. After all, he was nothing if not innovative.
             
            It would be easy to make them nicer. BTW, a canoe only needs one beam piece. All the aluminum pieces are 7/8" diam. x 1/16" wall aluminum. Probably tent poles. These outriggers are crap trap floats...2 per side, back to back.. 
            I'll post a picture labeled: "Outriggers".   
               Luck,  Roger L.  
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: Dennis O
            Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 2:36 PM
            Subject: Re: [Airolite_Boats] Seekimg a solo tub approach.

            I have never built a complete watercraft of any sort but I have been studying on this forum, books, magazines and other forums for years. If stability is your concern you do not need to go to such complicated lengths. The solution is simply a wider beam.

            It will be slightly slower but if age is an issue you are slightly slower as well--I'm 62--I understand. I too have had aluminum canoes. Most aluminum canoes get at least some of their stability from width not just weight. Also, it is a matter of inches, some times as little as 4 inches. Go back to the forum (where the real experts_I am not) and ask about widening slightly one of the stock designs (for example 2" on either side of the centerline).

            Widening would be much easier and less bulky than out riggers. A twin hull design would be stable but you are doubling the drag. 2-4" of width at the beam would gain the stability without the great increase in drag.

            One other note--chose something slightly longer because the stringers need to twist from the center to the stems. Extra width will compound the twist. spreading it over greater length will make it easier to build.

            Still, ask the real experts.


            Dennis


            --- On Thu, 1/10/13, george <kf2oc@...> wrote:

            From: george <kf2oc@...>
            Subject: [Airolite_Boats] Seekimg a solo tub approach.
            To: Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Thursday, January 10, 2013, 5:43 AM

             

            Just an aged newby to this group.  Had owned 15 and 17 foot standard weight aluminum canoes for many decades and many uses.  Now need a much lighter hull for use for nearby flat water fishing and flexible cartop to drop-in uses.  Need 300 pound capacity, with modestly high seat (due to reduced flexibility with aging).  Probably of quite modest length.

            Perhaps a stubby hull such as dinks use.  This to improve roll stability.  Due to reduced heading stability, am feeling the use of a double paddle may be useful.  Have previously constructed oars with cupped blades, as a base for producing such paddles.

            Had developed a prenchant for adjustable seating height from canoe uses. The lower position for navigating, with the highter position used after anchoring.  Height change could just be a temporarily added seat riser, inserted when conditions permit or after anchoring.

            Had noted the Airolite style quite some years ago, but I am not very familiar with current design ranges.  Has anyone considered using a dual hulled, cat-style design to gain roll stability at minimal displacements?  Maybe this could use a form suited to a two-off construction approach for the pair of hulls, with the wing between them providing the basic seating position with just one foot positioned within each hull.

            Does anyone have comments, suggestions or a basis for related approaches? 

            Many thanks, George.

             

             


          • george
            Message 5 of 16 , Jan 18, 2013
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com, Marianne Guidos wrote:
              >
              > mrkfortney@...
              >
              >
              > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Roger L wrote:
              >
              > > **
              > >
              > >
              > > **
              > > I drive an lightweight kevlar canoe. 38 lbs. Seats two, but really made
              > > for one. Fast and unstable. We had several near flips and one day we turned
              > > over in some fairly mild water just because we both turned our heads at the
              > > same moment to look at a passing boat. So we added klunky outriggers. What
              > > a difference! They weigh almost nothing, and the drag is negligible. After
              > > all, only one is in the water at any time and it is just skimming. If you
              > > balance perfectly, neither outrigger needs to touch. All in all, the
              > > tiny additional drag is more than offset by the fact that I can lean over
              > > and really get the paddle in the water when I want to. Now it won't tip no
              > > matter what. Assembly time is about a minute. And it is stable enough that
              > > we are comfortable where things used to be dicey.
              > >
              > > An Airolite would be the perfect application. I love his designs, and
              > > think the old boy would approve. After all, he was nothing if not
              > > innovative.
              > >
              > > It would be easy to make them nicer. BTW, a canoe only needs one beam
              > > piece. All the aluminum pieces are 7/8" diam. x 1/16" wall aluminum.
              > > Probably tent poles. These outriggers are crap trap floats...2 per side,
              > > back to back..
              > > I'll post a picture labeled: "Outriggers".
              > > Luck, Roger L.
              > >
              > > ----- Original Message -----
              > > *From:* Dennis O
              > > *To:* Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com
              > > *Sent:* Thursday, January 10, 2013 2:36 PM
              > > *Subject:* Re: [Airolite_Boats] Seekimg a solo tub approach.
              > >
              > > I have never built a complete watercraft of any sort but I have been
              > > studying on this forum, books, magazines and other forums for years. If
              > > stability is your concern you do not need to go to such complicated
              > > lengths. The solution is simply a wider beam.
              > >
              > > It will be slightly slower but if age is an issue you are slightly slower
              > > as well--I'm 62--I understand. I too have had aluminum canoes. Most
              > > aluminum canoes get at least some of their stability from width not just
              > > weight. Also, it is a matter of inches, some times as little as 4 inches.
              > > Go back to the forum (where the real experts_I am not) and ask about
              > > widening slightly one of the stock designs (for example 2" on either side
              > > of the centerline).
              > >
              > > Widening would be much easier and less bulky than out riggers. A twin hull
              > > design would be stable but you are doubling the drag. 2-4" of width at the
              > > beam would gain the stability without the great increase in drag.
              > >
              > > One other note--chose something slightly longer because the stringers need
              > > to twist from the center to the stems. Extra width will compound the twist.
              > > spreading it over greater length will make it easier to build.
              > >
              > > Still, ask the real experts.
              > >
              > >
              > > *Dennis *
              > >
              > >
              > > --- On *Thu, 1/10/13, george * wrote:
              > >
              > >
              > > From: george
              > > Subject: [Airolite_Boats] Seekimg a solo tub approach.
              > > To: Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com
              > > Date: Thursday, January 10, 2013, 5:43 AM
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Just an aged newby to this group. Had owned 15 and 17 foot standard
              > > weight aluminum canoes for many decades and many uses. Now need a much
              > > lighter hull for use for nearby flat water fishing and flexible cartop to
              > > drop-in uses. Need 300 pound capacity, with modestly high seat (due to
              > > reduced flexibility with aging). Probably of quite modest length.
              > >
              > > Perhaps a stubby hull such as dinks use. This to improve roll stability.
              > > Due to reduced heading stability, am feeling the use of a double paddle may
              > > be useful. Have previously constructed oars with cupped blades, as a base
              > > for producing such paddles.
              > >
              > > Had developed a prenchant for adjustable seating height from canoe
              > > uses. The lower position for navigating, with the highter position used
              > > after anchoring. Height change could just be a temporarily added seat
              > > riser, inserted when conditions permit or after anchoring.
              > >
              > > Had noted the Airolite style quite some years ago, but I am not very
              > > familiar with current design ranges. Has anyone considered using a dual
              > > hulled, cat-style design to gain roll stability at minimal displacements?
              > > Maybe this could use a form suited to a two-off construction approach for
              > > the pair of hulls, with the wing between them providing the basic seating
              > > position with just one foot positioned within each hull.
              > >
              > > Does anyone have comments, suggestions or a basis for related approaches?
              > >
              > > Many thanks, George.
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              >
            • george
              My apology for being AWOL. But if it is OK, I would like to continue with some considerations of my tub ideas versus employing outriggers or a dual hull
              Message 6 of 16 , Jan 18, 2013
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                My apology for being AWOL. But if it is OK, I would like to continue with some considerations of my " tub " ideas versus employing outriggers or a dual hull (cat) approach. Also responding to the posting of Dennis on this topic (in case he has made it back).

                Just adding beam has an appealing design simplicity. Had the idea of reducing the length in seeking to stabilize the total weight for that approach, thus the "tub". That may weakly dovetail with my preference for transporting by cartop.

                The CAT approach could have some advantage for portage because the 'wing' as the principle connection between the hulls could also serve as a carrying yoke as well as acting as a seat when on the water. And this may have good right and left side balance for good overhead carrying convenience.

                Some of my thinking about CAT hulls comes from a Florida design that appeared many years ago. For construction it used solid 4 inch thick sheets of glued foam insulation to achieve rather light weight. The top deck was totally flat, which seemed pretty clumsey from several aspects.

                Righting-moment versus hull shapes (and hull spacing for a CAT)is a pretty rich subject. It is easy to cite CAT sailing hulls or rowing CATS to indicate their drag is not a problem. That is too simple, and may not transfer to short hulls. Even so, it is just my feeling this is not a limitation for my short trips on flat water. Other applications may be differ.

                Stringer bending limitations may have other solutions at this small scale. Earlier I had considered using bulkheads of plastic foam insulation sheets covered with aluminum sheet. Some bulkhead shapes were derived and prototypes constructed. They can provide good support for the stringers, and offer an approach that limits the needed bending. The stringers may converge at the bow bulkhead but that bulkhead may be given added depth by adding another layer of insulation sheet that permits rounding for the bow nose (so the stringers need not fully converge).

                In that context the question of bulkhead shape can be reconsidered. In the context of heat shrinked sheeting over the stringers, if could be that adopting a 'hard chine' could be useful in stabilizing the steering of a short hull while also flattening the region of the relatively narrow floor area. Floor reinforcement would be applied in the area of the cockpit to support the pressure of the paddlers feet (or maybe even a standing fisherman in calm water).

                The cited experience with the 'Outriggers' is stimulating and encouraging. Their separation for transporting by car or by hand may not be so neat, and ditto for their assembly. But they seem most instructional about the possible stability and water drag aspects.

                Have there been any guides or modeling rules that supported the bending limits that Platt used in his design approaches ?? Ditto for the lateral trussing and stringer spacings supported in his designs ??

                It is good to see winter settling in, so now we can dream-up our next project and catch-up on some paperwork. Ha. Overall omments please.

                Cheers, George.


                --- In Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com, "george" wrote:
                >
                >
                >
                > --- In Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com, Marianne Guidos wrote:
                > >
                > > mrkfortney@
                > >
                > >
                > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Roger L wrote:
                > >
                > > > **
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > **
                > > > I drive an lightweight kevlar canoe. 38 lbs. Seats two, but really made
                > > > for one. Fast and unstable. We had several near flips and one day we turned
                > > > over in some fairly mild water just because we both turned our heads at the
                > > > same moment to look at a passing boat. So we added klunky outriggers. What
                > > > a difference! They weigh almost nothing, and the drag is negligible. After
                > > > all, only one is in the water at any time and it is just skimming. If you
                > > > balance perfectly, neither outrigger needs to touch. All in all, the
                > > > tiny additional drag is more than offset by the fact that I can lean over
                > > > and really get the paddle in the water when I want to. Now it won't tip no
                > > > matter what. Assembly time is about a minute. And it is stable enough that
                > > > we are comfortable where things used to be dicey.
                > > >
                > > > An Airolite would be the perfect application. I love his designs, and
                > > > think the old boy would approve. After all, he was nothing if not
                > > > innovative.
                > > >
                > > > It would be easy to make them nicer. BTW, a canoe only needs one beam
                > > > piece. All the aluminum pieces are 7/8" diam. x 1/16" wall aluminum.
                > > > Probably tent poles. These outriggers are crap trap floats...2 per side,
                > > > back to back..
                > > > I'll post a picture labeled: "Outriggers".
                > > > Luck, Roger L.
                > > >
                > > > ----- Original Message -----
                > > > *From:* Dennis O
                > > > *To:* Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com
                > > > *Sent:* Thursday, January 10, 2013 2:36 PM
                > > > *Subject:* Re: [Airolite_Boats] Seekimg a solo tub approach.
                > > >
                > > > I have never built a complete watercraft of any sort but I have been
                > > > studying on this forum, books, magazines and other forums for years. If
                > > > stability is your concern you do not need to go to such complicated
                > > > lengths. The solution is simply a wider beam.
                > > >
                > > > It will be slightly slower but if age is an issue you are slightly slower
                > > > as well--I'm 62--I understand. I too have had aluminum canoes. Most
                > > > aluminum canoes get at least some of their stability from width not just
                > > > weight. Also, it is a matter of inches, some times as little as 4 inches.
                > > > Go back to the forum (where the real experts_I am not) and ask about
                > > > widening slightly one of the stock designs (for example 2" on either side
                > > > of the centerline).
                > > >
                > > > Widening would be much easier and less bulky than out riggers. A twin hull
                > > > design would be stable but you are doubling the drag. 2-4" of width at the
                > > > beam would gain the stability without the great increase in drag.
                > > >
                > > > One other note--chose something slightly longer because the stringers need
                > > > to twist from the center to the stems. Extra width will compound the twist.
                > > > spreading it over greater length will make it easier to build.
                > > >
                > > > Still, ask the real experts.
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > *Dennis *
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > --- On *Thu, 1/10/13, george * wrote:
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > From: george
                > > > Subject: [Airolite_Boats] Seekimg a solo tub approach.
                > > > To: Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com
                > > > Date: Thursday, January 10, 2013, 5:43 AM
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > Just an aged newby to this group. Had owned 15 and 17 foot standard
                > > > weight aluminum canoes for many decades and many uses. Now need a much
                > > > lighter hull for use for nearby flat water fishing and flexible cartop to
                > > > drop-in uses. Need 300 pound capacity, with modestly high seat (due to
                > > > reduced flexibility with aging). Probably of quite modest length.
                > > >
                > > > Perhaps a stubby hull such as dinks use. This to improve roll stability.
                > > > Due to reduced heading stability, am feeling the use of a double paddle may
                > > > be useful. Have previously constructed oars with cupped blades, as a base
                > > > for producing such paddles.
                > > >
                > > > Had developed a prenchant for adjustable seating height from canoe
                > > > uses. The lower position for navigating, with the highter position used
                > > > after anchoring. Height change could just be a temporarily added seat
                > > > riser, inserted when conditions permit or after anchoring.
                > > >
                > > > Had noted the Airolite style quite some years ago, but I am not very
                > > > familiar with current design ranges. Has anyone considered using a dual
                > > > hulled, cat-style design to gain roll stability at minimal displacements?
                > > > Maybe this could use a form suited to a two-off construction approach for
                > > > the pair of hulls, with the wing between them providing the basic seating
                > > > position with just one foot positioned within each hull.
                > > >
                > > > Does anyone have comments, suggestions or a basis for related approaches?
                > > >
                > > > Many thanks, George.
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > >
                >
              • Caruk, Gord
                Hi George. In your first post on this topic back in Dec it sounded like you were wondering if Platt s method s could be used for the boat you re considering.
                Message 7 of 16 , Jan 24, 2013
                View Source
                • 1 Attachment
                • 406 KB

                Hi George.

                 

                In your first post on this topic back in Dec it sounded like you were wondering if Platt's method's could be used for the boat you're considering. My answer is yes. That method will work for other boats, and not just for the plans that are available from him. Here’s an outrigger canoe that I built a couple years ago. The boat was built using Platt’s methods from measurements in tables in Gary Dierking’s book http://www.amazon.ca/Building-Outrigger-Sailing-Canoes-Construction/dp/0071487913/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1359059790&sr=8-2    This looks somewhat like where you’re headed.

                 

                Gord

              • Richard Bertram
                Hi George, I made a Classic 10 and was planning on using it for crabbing. Once I got it made realized it was a little to tippy for that. Perhaps an outrigger
                Message 8 of 16 , Jan 27, 2013
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hi George, I made a Classic 10' and was planning on using it for crabbing. Once I got it made realized it was a little to tippy for that. Perhaps an outrigger would solve the problem. You have inspired me.

                  Richard

                  --- On Thu, 1/24/13, Caruk, Gord <gord.caruk@...> wrote:

                  From: Caruk, Gord <gord.caruk@...>
                  Subject: [Airolite_Boats] Re: Seekimg a solo tub approach. [1 Attachment]
                  To: "Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com" <Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com>
                  Date: Thursday, January 24, 2013, 12:40 PM

                   

                  Hi George.

                   

                  In your first post on this topic back in Dec it sounded like you were wondering if Platt's method's could be used for the boat you're considering. My answer is yes. That method will work for other boats, and not just for the plans that are available from him. Here’s an outrigger canoe that I built a couple years ago. The boat was built using Platt’s methods from measurements in tables in Gary Dierking’s book http://www.amazon.ca/Building-Outrigger-Sailing-Canoes-Construction/dp/0071487913/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1359059790&sr=8-2    This looks somewhat like where you’re headed.

                   

                  Gord

                • bschless
                  An outrigger on a class ic 10? Think I could oyster off it??? Beau Schless NOTEbookS Library Automation TEL: 978. 443.2996 CELL: 978.501.0574
                  Message 9 of 16 , Jan 27, 2013
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    An outrigger on a class ic 10?  Think I could  oyster off it???
                    Beau Schless
                    NOTEbookS Library Automation
                    TEL: 978. 443.2996
                    CELL: 978.501.0574
                    http://www.rasco.com



                    From:        Richard Bertram <richardbertram@...>
                    To:        Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com
                    Date:        01/27/2013 01:13 PM
                    Subject:        Re: [Airolite_Boats] Re: Seekimg a solo tub approach.
                    Sent by:        Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com




                     

                    Hi George, I made a Classic 10' and was planning on using it for crabbing. Once I got it made realized it was a little to tippy for that. Perhaps an outrigger would solve the problem. You have inspired me.

                    Richard

                    --- On Thu, 1/24/13, Caruk, Gord <gord.caruk@...> wrote:


                    From: Caruk, Gord <gord.caruk@...>
                    Subject: [Airolite_Boats] Re: Seekimg a solo tub approach. [1 Attachment]
                    To: "Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com" <Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com>
                    Date: Thursday, January 24, 2013, 12:40 PM

                     

                    Hi George.

                     

                    In your first post on this topic back in Dec it sounded like you were wondering if Platt's method's could be used for the boat you're considering. My answer is yes. That method will work for other boats, and not just for the plans that are available from him. Here’s an outrigger canoe that I built a couple years ago. The boat was built using Platt’s methods from measurements in tables in Gary Dierking’s book http://www.amazon.ca/Building-Outrigger-Sailing-Canoes-Construction/dp/0071487913/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1359059790&sr=8-2    This looks somewhat like where you’re headed.

                     

                    Gord


                  • george
                    Back to you Gord and Richard - - For now, s symetric CAT approach using a pair of similar hulls joined by a fixed wing that also serves as a seat, is holding
                    Message 10 of 16 , Jan 28, 2013
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Back to you Gord and Richard - -

                      For now, s symetric CAT approach using a pair of similar hulls joined by a fixed wing that also serves as a seat, is holding my interest. Perhaps the old ACQUA CAT using a pair of foam filled pontoons would be one related starting point. There have also been some high performance competitive rowing cats in more recent times. For these, the position of the rower resulted in a rather high CG.

                      The 8 pound hulls designed by Platt, offers some encouragement toward using a joined pair of hulls. Each hull of my pair could have much less beam but about the same length which he used. In my case the pair of hulls would use a separation of about 14 inches to seek improved righting moment to make the combination less tippy. When seated on the 'wing', the pilot could place one foot in each of the hull pair while paddling or rowing. This relatively low CG is considered useful. The hull profiles are definately TBD, currently.

                      I have been usefully perusing the contents of the GEODESIC Aerolite website. Little has been found to guide rib, stringer and roving design choices for altered configurations and loadings. Maybe Platt relied on his long and incitful experiance. It is not clear if there could be other good sources of such information.

                      Cheers, George.

                      --- In Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com, Richard Bertram wrote:
                      >
                      > Hi George, I made a Classic 10' and was planning on using it for crabbing. Once I got it made realized it was a little to tippy for that. Perhaps an outrigger would solve the problem. You have inspired me.
                      >
                      > Richard
                      >
                      > --- On Thu, 1/24/13, Caruk, Gord wrote:
                      >
                      > From: Caruk, Gord
                      > Subject: [Airolite_Boats] Re: Seekimg a solo tub approach. [1 Attachment]
                      > To: "Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com"
                      > Date: Thursday, January 24, 2013, 12:40 PM
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >  
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > [Attachment(s) from Caruk, Gord included below]
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Hi George.
                      >  
                      > In your first post on this topic back in Dec it sounded like you were wondering if Platt's method's could be used for the boat you're considering. My answer is yes. That method will work for other boats, and not just for the plans that
                      > are available from him. Here’s an outrigger canoe that I built a couple years ago. The boat was built using Platt’s methods from measurements in tables in Gary Dierking’s book
                      >
                      > http://www.amazon.ca/Building-Outrigger-Sailing-Canoes-Construction/dp/0071487913/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1359059790&sr=8-2%c3%82%c2%a0   This looks somewhat like where you’re headed.
                      >
                      >  
                      > Gord
                      >
                    • fiatphil2000
                      Hello Gordon, Every once in a while, something new and worthwile floats by and I happen to be looking. On your advice, I ordered Dierking s book and found it
                      Message 11 of 16 , Feb 4, 2013
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hello Gordon,
                        Every once in a while, something new and worthwile floats by and I happen to be looking. On your advice, I ordered Dierking's book and found it a fascinating read. Particularly the "Shunting" concept. I like the asymmetric design of the T2. It seems very fast, stable and efficient with the Gibbons/Dierking sail.
                        I think your canoe appears traditional and full depth. What are your thoughts about the sealed lower compartment of the T2 in a Platt design?
                        Could a flange be built that would seal a plywood floor against the sides of Dacron? We assume our Dacron will be as watertight as his strip planked hull, but I'm not sure how to seal the floor.
                        One alternative would be to sandwich foam between all the bulkheads below the floor and lay the floor on top. This would add some weight, but not the 65 lbs his strip planked hull weighed. One could fair the foam between bulkheads and apply the dacon and Kevlar per usual. It would stiffen the hull and afford some puncture protection.
                        I'm going to 3D model the hull and calulate the actual volume/weight of the foam. Rough estimate is 20 lb. before lightening holes.
                        As you seem to be the only person who has done the outrigger. I would appreciate your thoughts on the very deep and sharp T2 hull. Also any experience with the very light Ama (outrigger).

                        Phil D

                        --- In Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com, "Caruk, Gord" wrote:
                        >
                        > Hi George.
                        >
                        > In your first post on this topic back in Dec it sounded like you were wondering if Platt's method's could be used for the boat you're considering. My answer is yes. That method will work for other boats, and not just for the plans that are available from him. Here's an outrigger canoe that I built a couple years ago. The boat was built using Platt's methods from measurements in tables in Gary Dierking's book http://www.amazon.ca/Building-Outrigger-Sailing-Canoes-Construction/dp/0071487913/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1359059790&sr=8-2 This looks somewhat like where you're headed.
                        >
                        > Gord
                        >
                      • Anthony Townsend
                        Phil, You might also look through some of Dave Gentry s designs and experiments. He had a very narrow outrigger canoe at Sail Oklahoma back in Oct. 2012 that
                        Message 12 of 16 , Feb 4, 2013
                        View Source
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Phil,

                          You might also look through some of Dave Gentry's designs and experiments.  He had a very narrow outrigger canoe at Sail Oklahoma back in Oct. 2012 that might be similar in terms of structure to what you are considering.  Dave is a great guy with a lot of experience and success moving traditional designs to SOF.

                          Tony

                          On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 2:32 PM, fiatphil2000 <p.dorothy@...> wrote:
                           

                          Hello Gordon,
                          Every once in a while, something new and worthwile floats by and I happen to be looking. On your advice, I ordered Dierking's book and found it a fascinating read. Particularly the "Shunting" concept. I like the asymmetric design of the T2. It seems very fast, stable and efficient with the Gibbons/Dierking sail.
                          I think your canoe appears traditional and full depth. What are your thoughts about the sealed lower compartment of the T2 in a Platt design?
                          Could a flange be built that would seal a plywood floor against the sides of Dacron? We assume our Dacron will be as watertight as his strip planked hull, but I'm not sure how to seal the floor.
                          One alternative would be to sandwich foam between all the bulkheads below the floor and lay the floor on top. This would add some weight, but not the 65 lbs his strip planked hull weighed. One could fair the foam between bulkheads and apply the dacon and Kevlar per usual. It would stiffen the hull and afford some puncture protection.
                          I'm going to 3D model the hull and calulate the actual volume/weight of the foam. Rough estimate is 20 lb. before lightening holes.
                          As you seem to be the only person who has done the outrigger. I would appreciate your thoughts on the very deep and sharp T2 hull. Also any experience with the very light Ama (outrigger).

                          Phil D

                          --- In Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com, "Caruk, Gord" wrote:
                          >
                          > Hi George.
                          >
                          > In your first post on this topic back in Dec it sounded like you were wondering if Platt's method's could be used for the boat you're considering. My answer is yes. That method will work for other boats, and not just for the plans that are available from him. Here's an outrigger canoe that I built a couple years ago. The boat was built using Platt's methods from measurements in tables in Gary Dierking's book http://www.amazon.ca/Building-Outrigger-Sailing-Canoes-Construction/dp/0071487913/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1359059790&sr=8-2 This looks somewhat like where you're headed.
                          >
                          > Gord
                          >


                        • george
                          Ok Phil, and also acknowledging note 1597 from Tony. Pleased to be sharing these keen interests, but not so sure the solo tub monicker is still very fitting
                          Message 13 of 16 , Feb 5, 2013
                          View Source
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Ok Phil, and also acknowledging note 1597 from Tony.

                            Pleased to be sharing these keen interests, but not so sure the 'solo tub' monicker is still very fitting for this topic thread. The content is much more important than the title, and I am not at all objecting about continuing its use.

                            Originally I chose the 'solo tub' title in seeking to make it clear that speed performance holds little interest for my particular purposes. I want to construct something light and rather stable to get back onto flat water. I doubt that I had mentioned that I am an octogenarian, so that due to reduced flexibility, the higher seating in the range of 14 inches is also of vital interest to me.

                            My previous thinking about using a symetric catamarine approach has been progressing. I have constructed a full size bow configuration mock-up using one eighth inch foam art sheet. This is only a bow pontoon section. A symetric pair of such pontoons would be used with a fixed joining wing to provide a one-piece walk away hull with no removable parts for transport purposes. I have given this the name of PS CAT, with PS taken from Paddled Symetric CAT.

                            The nose mockup is for a covered pontoon that is eight inches deep. At the base it has the general width of 10 inches and 14 inches at the top surface. A projected spacing between the top edges of the pair of hulls is also about 12 or 14 inches, and the pontoons are planned to include an open section 'cockpit' to accomodate foot space and lower the overall CG, with good seating height for the crew. It may also be possible to accomodate a passenger. For starters, the probable pontoon length is about ten feet.

                            This basic hull configuration offers a uniform wrapping distance for the covering, thus avoiding any need for stretching or shrinking of the covering to accomodate two dimentional curves. The nose is shaped to a point in two stages that requires just one short cut in each side of the one-piece cover, rejoined for one short seam to sustain the avoidance of wrinkles. Actually, the one-piece hull covering includes a one stage cross-section convergence to a base width of 5 inches, with a top width of 7 inches, and a height of 4 inches, with all aligned to a flat top surface. The second stage reduction to a point is by an add-on that is secured with wood screws, and therefore can be readily removed or altered. This second stage adds 4 inches to the hull length, with the first stage convergence being over an 8 inch length. So this nose convergence occurs over 12 inches of the hull length.

                            The seating is expected to be combined with the wing that joins the pair of pontoons, and is adjacent to the floored cockpit opening in the pontoons. This area of the pontoon is expected to have a box form to support the various parts including four stringers for each pontoon. It is thought this box can be arranged as a first step in construction, so it can be employed more or less like a strongback to help control the central placement of the stringers in the initial stage of assembly. We shall see.

                            With an overall assembled beam of about 40 or 42 inchesa at the top of the pontoons, the PS CAT is expected to provide pretty good stability. And since the max beam is down at the top of the pontoons, this wide beam is expected to accomodate paddling quite well, perhaps using a double paddle. Cheers, George.

                            --- In Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com, "fiatphil2000" wrote:
                            >
                            > Hello Gordon,
                            > Every once in a while, something new and worthwile floats by and I happen to be looking. On your advice, I ordered Dierking's book and found it a fascinating read. Particularly the "Shunting" concept. I like the asymmetric design of the T2. It seems very fast, stable and efficient with the Gibbons/Dierking sail.
                            > I think your canoe appears traditional and full depth. What are your thoughts about the sealed lower compartment of the T2 in a Platt design?
                            > Could a flange be built that would seal a plywood floor against the sides of Dacron? We assume our Dacron will be as watertight as his strip planked hull, but I'm not sure how to seal the floor.
                            > One alternative would be to sandwich foam between all the bulkheads below the floor and lay the floor on top. This would add some weight, but not the 65 lbs his strip planked hull weighed. One could fair the foam between bulkheads and apply the dacon and Kevlar per usual. It would stiffen the hull and afford some puncture protection.
                            > I'm going to 3D model the hull and calulate the actual volume/weight of the foam. Rough estimate is 20 lb. before lightening holes.
                            > As you seem to be the only person who has done the outrigger. I would appreciate your thoughts on the very deep and sharp T2 hull. Also any experience with the very light Ama (outrigger).
                            >
                            > Phil D
                            >
                            > --- In Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com, "Caruk, Gord" wrote:
                            > >
                            > > Hi George.
                            > >
                            > > In your first post on this topic back in Dec it sounded like you were wondering if Platt's method's could be used for the boat you're considering. My answer is yes. That method will work for other boats, and not just for the plans that are available from him. Here's an outrigger canoe that I built a couple years ago. The boat was built using Platt's methods from measurements in tables in Gary Dierking's book http://www.amazon.ca/Building-Outrigger-Sailing-Canoes-Construction/dp/0071487913/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1359059790&sr=8-2 This looks somewhat like where you're headed.
                            > >
                            > > Gord
                            > >
                            >
                          • anton berteaux
                            Dang it, I really don t need any more books on the shelf, but I had to get this one! Thankfully there is Amazon. What about a floor, maybe even slats with
                            Message 14 of 16 , Feb 6, 2013
                            View Source
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Dang it, I really don't need any more books on the shelf, but I had to get this one! Thankfully there is Amazon. 

                              What about a floor, maybe even slats with Dacron, holding in a loosely fitted, airtight bag as flotation? Like a dry bag used for storage of items in a closed off area? Storage and floatation at the same time? It would just have to be secured well enough that it would not ever come loose and allow the boat to sink...

                              Anton


                              On Feb 4, 2013, at 3:19 PM, Anthony Townsend wrote:

                               

                              Phil,


                              You might also look through some of Dave Gentry's designs and experiments.  He had a very narrow outrigger canoe at Sail Oklahoma back in Oct. 2012 that might be similar in terms of structure to what you are considering.  Dave is a great guy with a lot of experience and success moving traditional designs to SOF.

                              Tony

                              On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 2:32 PM, fiatphil2000 <p.dorothy@...> wrote:
                               

                              Hello Gordon,
                              Every once in a while, something new and worthwile floats by and I happen to be looking. On your advice, I ordered Dierking's book and found it a fascinating read. Particularly the "Shunting" concept. I like the asymmetric design of the T2. It seems very fast, stable and efficient with the Gibbons/Dierking sail.
                              I think your canoe appears traditional and full depth. What are your thoughts about the sealed lower compartment of the T2 in a Platt design?
                              Could a flange be built that would seal a plywood floor against the sides of Dacron? We assume our Dacron will be as watertight as his strip planked hull, but I'm not sure how to seal the floor.
                              One alternative would be to sandwich foam between all the bulkheads below the floor and lay the floor on top. This would add some weight, but not the 65 lbs his strip planked hull weighed. One could fair the foam between bulkheads and apply the dacon and Kevlar per usual. It would stiffen the hull and afford some puncture protection.
                              I'm going to 3D model the hull and calulate the actual volume/weight of the foam. Rough estimate is 20 lb. before lightening holes.
                              As you seem to be the only person who has done the outrigger. I would appreciate your thoughts on the very deep and sharp T2 hull. Also any experience with the very light Ama (outrigger).

                              Phil D

                              --- In Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com, "Caruk, Gord" wrote:
                              >
                              > Hi George.
                              >
                              > In your first post on this topic back in Dec it sounded like you were wondering if Platt's method's could be used for the boat you're considering. My answer is yes. That method will work for other boats, and not just for the plans that are available from him. Here's an outrigger canoe that I built a couple years ago. The boat was built using Platt's methods from measurements in tables in Gary Dierking's book http://www.amazon.ca/Building-Outrigger-Sailing-Canoes-Construction/dp/0071487913/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1359059790&sr=8-2 This looks somewhat like where you're headed.
                              >
                              > Gord
                              >




                              Note: my new email is anton@...
                              All others are supserseded, and will probably be void in a few months.

                            • Aaron Wood
                              Anton et al. If I were adding floatation to one of these boats (mine floats fine even full of water) I would add two floatation bags, one in each end. These
                              Message 15 of 16 , Feb 6, 2013
                              View Source
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Anton et al.

                                If I were adding floatation to one of these boats (mine floats fine even full of water) I would add two floatation bags, one in each end. These are the types of floatation bags used in whitewater canoes. A cage made of cord can be tied in the ends and the bags inflated inside of the cage. These can be found at any whitewater paddling shop, REI in the US or MEC in Canada. I do a lot of whitewater paddling in canoes and these bags are very effective.

                                Cheers,

                                Aaron
                                Sent from my BlackBerry

                                From: anton berteaux <junkmailsupreme@...>
                                Sender: Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com
                                Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 09:48:00 -0800
                                To: <Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com>
                                ReplyTo: Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com
                                Subject: Re: [Airolite_Boats] Re: Seekimg a solo tub approach.

                                 

                                Dang it, I really don't need any more books on the shelf, but I had to get this one! Thankfully there is Amazon. 


                                What about a floor, maybe even slats with Dacron, holding in a loosely fitted, airtight bag as flotation? Like a dry bag used for storage of items in a closed off area? Storage and floatation at the same time? It would just have to be secured well enough that it would not ever come loose and allow the boat to sink...

                                Anton


                                On Feb 4, 2013, at 3:19 PM, Anthony Townsend wrote:

                                 

                                Phil,


                                You might also look through some of Dave Gentry's designs and experiments.  He had a very narrow outrigger canoe at Sail Oklahoma back in Oct. 2012 that might be similar in terms of structure to what you are considering.  Dave is a great guy with a lot of experience and success moving traditional designs to SOF.

                                Tony

                                On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 2:32 PM, fiatphil2000 <p.dorothy@...> wrote:
                                 

                                Hello Gordon,
                                Every once in a while, something new and worthwile floats by and I happen to be looking. On your advice, I ordered Dierking's book and found it a fascinating read. Particularly the "Shunting" concept. I like the asymmetric design of the T2. It seems very fast, stable and efficient with the Gibbons/Dierking sail.
                                I think your canoe appears traditional and full depth. What are your thoughts about the sealed lower compartment of the T2 in a Platt design?
                                Could a flange be built that would seal a plywood floor against the sides of Dacron? We assume our Dacron will be as watertight as his strip planked hull, but I'm not sure how to seal the floor.
                                One alternative would be to sandwich foam between all the bulkheads below the floor and lay the floor on top. This would add some weight, but not the 65 lbs his strip planked hull weighed. One could fair the foam between bulkheads and apply the dacon and Kevlar per usual. It would stiffen the hull and afford some puncture protection.
                                I'm going to 3D model the hull and calulate the actual volume/weight of the foam. Rough estimate is 20 lb. before lightening holes.
                                As you seem to be the only person who has done the outrigger. I would appreciate your thoughts on the very deep and sharp T2 hull. Also any experience with the very light Ama (outrigger).

                                Phil D

                                --- In Airolite_Boats@yahoogroups.com, "Caruk, Gord" wrote:
                                >
                                > Hi George.
                                >
                                > In your first post on this topic back in Dec it sounded like you were wondering if Platt's method's could be used for the boat you're considering. My answer is yes. That method will work for other boats, and not just for the plans that are available from him. Here's an outrigger canoe that I built a couple years ago. The boat was built using Platt's methods from measurements in tables in Gary Dierking's book http://www.amazon.ca/Building-Outrigger-Sailing-Canoes-Construction/dp/0071487913/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1359059790&sr=8-2 This looks somewhat like where you're headed.
                                >
                                > Gord
                                >




                                Note: my new email is anton@...
                                All others are supserseded, and will probably be void in a few months.

                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.