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

Re: Reply: Is the Blobster suitable for Cheasapeake Bay cruising?

Expand Messages
  • prairiedog2332
    No! Have not seen that photo. Is that a Blobster? Interesting to compare with the Micro.
    Message 1 of 29 , Aug 6, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      No! Have not seen that photo. Is that a Blobster? Interesting to compare
      with the Micro.

      <http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/4738692/sn/1417607285/name/10_All+done+and\
      +waiting+for+the+paint+job.jpg>

      <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Michalak/photos/album/1820081684/pic/4993\
      06809/view?picmode=&mode=tn&order=ordinal&start=1&count=20&dir=asc>

      The Micro has higher companionway rails which results in the opening
      being higher off the deck and less chance of slop entering the cabin.
      But it does not have the slot opening forward. Also the Micro has a
      rectangular hatch opening. Blobster appears to be more square so not as
      much leg room if sailing with the hatch cover off.

      This deck set-up can easily be "converted" to a foot well by installing
      a tub box in the hatch opening for ones feet. But if you go for a
      self-draining foot well not so easy to convert back.

      Nels


      --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, Alan Shapcott <logicaid@...> wrote:
      >
      > Hi,
      > Have you not seen this picture which shows the arrangement very
      well...? I believe this is essentially the same as a Bolger Micro. Nels?
      > I hasten to add that I know only what I have seen on the net and in
      Bolger's books with regards to both these designs!!
      >
      http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/4738692/sn/1417607285/name/10_All+done+and+\
      waiting+for+the+paint+job.jpg
      > Cheers,
      > Alan.
      >
      > --- On Fri, 6/8/10, luke_seubert luke_seubert@... wrote:
      >
      > From: luke_seubert luke_seubert@...
      > Subject: [Michalak] Re: Reply: Is the Blobster suitable for
      Cheasapeake Bay cruising?
      > To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
      > Date: Friday, 6, August, 2010, 4:08 PM
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "prairiedog2332" nelsarv@ wrote:
      > >
      > > I will try to clarify things a bit from my perspective.
      > >
      > > I think the cockpit/aft deck on the Blobster is the same as on Viola
      22
      > > for which Jim says:
      > >
      > > "Aft of the cabin is a large flat cockpit with great storage
      > > underneath which is accessible from both the cockpit and
      > > from the cabin. One trip on a Micro will show you what
      > > a wonderful setup this is. Best of all, this type of deck
      > > is very quick and easy to build."
      > >
      > > http://www.duckworksbbs.com/plans/jim/viola22/index.htm
      > >
      > I think, but am not sure, that the cockpit/aft deck of Blobster is a
      bit different from Viola. Viola has a substantial aft "buoyancy box",
      from the looks of it. Blobster might have a thin one, but it does have a
      small wet well. Now the deck and footwell parts of the cockpit might be
      very similar between Viola and Blobster.
      >
      > By the way, to clarify a point of confusion. The structure I refer to
      as "benches" is the part of the cockpit running along the port and
      starboard sides, where one usually sits. I know it isn't a "bench" in
      the conventional sense, but I use the term to distinguish these areas
      from the center of the cockpit, which is occupied by covered deck, open
      footwell, and then covered deck.
      >
      > What I do not understand about the Blobster cockpit design, is the
      footwell area. That is the source of my confusion. If I could get a
      proper description, or some photos, then I would understand it better.
      >
      > > You might also notice the scuppers in the sides immediately aft the
      main
      > > bulkhead. I would not make them too small as they can get plugged
      with
      > > leaves etc., if the boat is stored outside and it storms, allowing
      > > rainwater to lie on the deck. and could lead to the paint lifting or
      > > bubbling.
      > >
      > > No need ever for a bilge pump with that setup. A sponge at most!
      > >
      > So long as the footwell hatch is in place. If the footwell hatch is
      removed while sailing, the footwell is exposed and water can get in
      there. Now, that need not be a large problem, depending on the design -
      which, as I stated above, I don't fully understand at this point.
      >
      >
      > > A fellow from OZ has built two Micros, one with the builder
      requiring a
      > > self-draining cockpit which he did but only because he was ordered
      to. I
      > > guess it depends on personal preference. If I was going to have one
      I
      > > would want a cover over it if stored outside and give up the extra
      > > storage space below - which is amazing in a Micro - as you can crawl
      > > right inside from the cabin. With a self-draining cockpit you only
      have
      > > two narrow storage accesses on each side and a bit under the well.
      One
      > > Micro owner installed two deadlights in the sides of the hold and
      his
      > > kids slept there and used it as a playpen:-)
      > >
      > I understand and appreciate all the storage space, potential storage
      space, that exists underneath the cockpit deck. One can place an
      enormous amount of stuff in there, and it can also serve as a large
      watertight volume with lots of positive buoyancy. These are all good
      things.
      >
      >
      > > Inner window panels could be removable if they seep. Actually I like
      the
      > > wiley port design that can be opened of closed right off with some
      foam
      > > bits. Will try to upload a file on it.
      > >
      > Please post a message if you are able to upload the file - I would
      like to see it. Thanks.
      >
      >
      > > I looked hard and long into electric as well. Gets very complicated
      and
      > > expensive if done to have reliable recharging capability. Even have
      a
      > > small genset I could use, but you have to carry gas for it anyway.
      To
      > > get shore power for recharging, means staying at marinas instead of
      > > stopping anywhere you prefer. I have a professional background in
      both
      > > wind and solar power and neither option works that well in a
      sheltered
      > > anchorage. Solar panels are much overrated as to their actual
      > > performance. Even the best deep-cycle batteries can not be
      discharged
      > > more than 50 percent or so without risking damage. A 5 liter gas
      tank
      > > will out-last 100 lb of batteries in my view and are a lot easier to
      > > replenish.
      > >
      > Technologically, we are getting close to really efficient solar panels
      and really power dense batteries, but we aren't quite there yet - unless
      you want to pay a lot of money, that is. There are some early prototype
      airplanes - reconnaissance aircraft mostly - which use solar panels on
      the wings and batteries to stay aloft for extended periods. That
      technology will trickle down and drop in cost eventually, at which time,
      electric-solar boats will become more practical, especially if they
      include a wind generator.
      >
      > But yeah, I think you are right - right now, solar-electric for main
      propulsion doesn't work. As supplemental propulsion? Hmm, possibly.
      Right now, gas motors are cheaper. But solar panels and batteries should
      suffice for navigation, communication, and audio systems.
      >
      > Cheers,
      > Luke
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
    • prairiedog2332
      I am not aware of the finer points of installing a steel plate bottom to a sharpie. I have read some information about the Bolger idea in MAIB at one time, and
      Message 2 of 29 , Aug 6, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        I am not aware of the finer points of installing a steel plate bottom to
        a sharpie. I have read some information about the Bolger idea in MAIB at
        one time, and Susanne has written about it at the Bolger group.

        I think it would work great on a Jukebox3 for example. (Which calls for
        water ballast tanks,) For some reason I find the idea a bit
        intimidating. I wonder what the advantage is to just adding another
        layer of plywood to the bottom with heavier glass? I guess the answer
        obviously is that steel is heavier and has more abrasion resistance.

        I am not convinced it won't rust in fresh water, but there are barrier
        coats that can protect it.

        I guess my main concern is first getting it bent properly to match the
        hull rocker and then trimmed to the bilge interface. Then attaching and
        sealing it to the plywood bottom with no chance of rot invading it. The
        two materials have different expansion/contraction coefficients, plus
        there are all those screw holes that require sealing. So a sealant like
        3M5200 would have to be used and maybe tighten the screws so it squeezes
        out to seal the holes?

        Then the heavier hull has to be turned upright, wheras installing an
        extra plywood layer and then some addtional internal iron ballast can be
        done after it is flipped, and is protected from water inside the hull
        and can be relocated for best balance.

        So far as I know this has never been accepted as an option, which also
        makes me wonder why not?

        With all respect, Susanne Altenburger is a terrific engineer. But has
        she ever actually built a boat? Two of her designs have been less than
        successful in actual usage. But that is not relevant to this group as
        they were quite a lot larger than most of us are looking into.

        Nels

        >
        > I wanted to comment on the cost of the steel plate bottoms for
        sharpies.
        >
        > I have not built a sharpie, much less one with a steel plate bottom as
        ballast. I do however think it is a great idea on so many fronts. A
        year or more ago, I purchased plans for the Bolger AS29, and 39. I also
        received with the AS29 plans some Bolger "updates" including some very
        interesting info on insulating, and steel plate ballast.
        >
        > While "researching" costs for the boat project, I asked my local metal
        work guy (owns a metalworking business) about the cost of using steel
        plate as ballast. In a nutshell, I thought it was cheap, actually
        cheaper than I had imagined. The steel plate is very cheap, you
        basically pay a commodity price for it. The shipping of the plate is
        what will cost you, often more than the product itself. My friend said
        if I could wait until he batched an order (bi-monthly), the shipping
        cost would be less.
        >
        > The cost of cutting the plate, grinding the edges, and drilling the
        holes is done by the hour, but would not take long. Bending would take
        just minutes on the press.
        >
        > I did not get an estimate on galvanizing. On a trailer boat it would
        not be needed. I can't imagine ballast on a Michalak boat being more
        than a few hundred US. Now if you can do something for free, any price
        is expensive, but I really felt the steel plate was cheap. Now compare
        that to lead. Yeah sure it "may" be free, if you chase it down, but
        your going to have to buy stuff and really mess with it to get it to do
        what you want (IE, melting, casting, etc). There is a cost of time, and
        money there too.
        >
        > Again, no argument, just pointing out that steel plate is (from a
        mechanical perspective) fairly cheap and easy.
        >
        > Have a wonderful weekend everyone!
        >
        >
        > Chris
        >
      • TheM
        When I still had the AS29 plans with the new updates there was a few pages Bolger wrote up about mounting steel plate. I m sure I ll bastardize it all up,
        Message 3 of 29 , Aug 6, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          When I still had the AS29 plans with the new "updates" there was a few pages Bolger wrote up about mounting steel plate. I'm sure I'll bastardize it all up, but essentially this is what he was trying to do:

          Make the plates sized for easy handling, that will multiply easily on your boat, but also make the most efficient use of plate sizes.

          Each plate got one bolt per corner. Corners were rounded, and chamfered bolts were used.

          Bolger suggested drilling the bolt holes oversize and sealing with epoxy. Then re-drilling with the correct size. He also suggested using 5200 to seal. He expected you to use large hardware and washers, and to see 5200 squashed up through the bolt holes.

          Lastly, my mechanical guy says the bending part is a breeze and can be done quickly. You can paint, but galvanizing is also an option, and not too costly (considering you can dump a grand or more into a bottom job quite easily (trust me!!!)).

          before reading what Bolger had written, I did not know how it could work also. I think La Cabotin has a bottom done up that way.

          Anyway, that is another fine sharpie I would love to see more of.

          I must stop blabbering. I'm almost done building a small travel trailer but I must get back to it. We finally leave Idaho in two weeks, Yahoo!

          Have a good weekend all!!!!

          CC

          --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "prairiedog2332" <nelsarv@...> wrote:
          >
          > I am not aware of the finer points of installing a steel plate bottom to
          > a sharpie. I have read some information about the Bolger idea in MAIB at
          > one time, and Susanne has written about it at the Bolger group.
          >
          > I think it would work great on a Jukebox3 for example. (Which calls for
          > water ballast tanks,) For some reason I find the idea a bit
          > intimidating. I wonder what the advantage is to just adding another
          > layer of plywood to the bottom with heavier glass? I guess the answer
          > obviously is that steel is heavier and has more abrasion resistance.
          >
          > I am not convinced it won't rust in fresh water, but there are barrier
          > coats that can protect it.
          >
          > I guess my main concern is first getting it bent properly to match the
          > hull rocker and then trimmed to the bilge interface. Then attaching and
          > sealing it to the plywood bottom with no chance of rot invading it. The
          > two materials have different expansion/contraction coefficients, plus
          > there are all those screw holes that require sealing. So a sealant like
          > 3M5200 would have to be used and maybe tighten the screws so it squeezes
          > out to seal the holes?
          >
          > Then the heavier hull has to be turned upright, wheras installing an
          > extra plywood layer and then some addtional internal iron ballast can be
          > done after it is flipped, and is protected from water inside the hull
          > and can be relocated for best balance.
          >
          > So far as I know this has never been accepted as an option, which also
          > makes me wonder why not?
          >
          > With all respect, Susanne Altenburger is a terrific engineer. But has
          > she ever actually built a boat? Two of her designs have been less than
          > successful in actual usage. But that is not relevant to this group as
          > they were quite a lot larger than most of us are looking into.
          >
          > Nels
          >
          > >
          > > I wanted to comment on the cost of the steel plate bottoms for
          > sharpies.
          > >
          > > I have not built a sharpie, much less one with a steel plate bottom as
          > ballast. I do however think it is a great idea on so many fronts. A
          > year or more ago, I purchased plans for the Bolger AS29, and 39. I also
          > received with the AS29 plans some Bolger "updates" including some very
          > interesting info on insulating, and steel plate ballast.
          > >
          > > While "researching" costs for the boat project, I asked my local metal
          > work guy (owns a metalworking business) about the cost of using steel
          > plate as ballast. In a nutshell, I thought it was cheap, actually
          > cheaper than I had imagined. The steel plate is very cheap, you
          > basically pay a commodity price for it. The shipping of the plate is
          > what will cost you, often more than the product itself. My friend said
          > if I could wait until he batched an order (bi-monthly), the shipping
          > cost would be less.
          > >
          > > The cost of cutting the plate, grinding the edges, and drilling the
          > holes is done by the hour, but would not take long. Bending would take
          > just minutes on the press.
          > >
          > > I did not get an estimate on galvanizing. On a trailer boat it would
          > not be needed. I can't imagine ballast on a Michalak boat being more
          > than a few hundred US. Now if you can do something for free, any price
          > is expensive, but I really felt the steel plate was cheap. Now compare
          > that to lead. Yeah sure it "may" be free, if you chase it down, but
          > your going to have to buy stuff and really mess with it to get it to do
          > what you want (IE, melting, casting, etc). There is a cost of time, and
          > money there too.
          > >
          > > Again, no argument, just pointing out that steel plate is (from a
          > mechanical perspective) fairly cheap and easy.
          > >
          > > Have a wonderful weekend everyone!
          > >
          > >
          > > Chris
          > >
          >
        • Carl
          1/4 steel plate weighs 10.21lb/sqft, 1/2 weighs 20.42lb/sqft So why not tiles or make strips of easy to handle pieces to ballast the boat inside or outside.
          Message 4 of 29 , Aug 6, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            1/4" steel plate weighs 10.21lb/sqft, 1/2" weighs 20.42lb/sqft So why not tiles or make strips of easy to handle pieces to ballast the boat inside or outside. You would need the structure of the boat to be solid enough to carry the weight but you need that no matter what the steel looks like. The benefit is much simpler and cheaper fabrication of the steel. I've never done this, it just sounds like an easier way to go. It sounds like what Bolger was getting at.



            ----- Original Message -----
            From: TheM
            To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Friday, August 06, 2010 4:11 PM
            Subject: [Michalak] Re: Steel plate bottom?



            When I still had the AS29 plans with the new "updates" there was a few pages Bolger wrote up about mounting steel plate. I'm sure I'll bastardize it all up, but essentially this is what he was trying to do:

            Make the plates sized for easy handling, that will multiply easily on your boat, but also make the most efficient use of plate sizes.

            Each plate got one bolt per corner. Corners were rounded, and chamfered bolts were used.

            Bolger suggested drilling the bolt holes oversize and sealing with epoxy. Then re-drilling with the correct size. He also suggested using 5200 to seal. He expected you to use large hardware and washers, and to see 5200 squashed up through the bolt holes.

            Lastly, my mechanical guy says the bending part is a breeze and can be done quickly. You can paint, but galvanizing is also an option, and not too costly (considering you can dump a grand or more into a bottom job quite easily (trust me!!!)).

            before reading what Bolger had written, I did not know how it could work also. I think La Cabotin has a bottom done up that way.

            Anyway, that is another fine sharpie I would love to see more of.

            I must stop blabbering. I'm almost done building a small travel trailer but I must get back to it. We finally leave Idaho in two weeks, Yahoo!

            Have a good weekend all!!!!

            CC

            --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "prairiedog2332" <nelsarv@...> wrote:
            >
            > I am not aware of the finer points of installing a steel plate bottom to
            > a sharpie. I have read some information about the Bolger idea in MAIB at
            > one time, and Susanne has written about it at the Bolger group.
            >
            > I think it would work great on a Jukebox3 for example. (Which calls for
            > water ballast tanks,) For some reason I find the idea a bit
            > intimidating. I wonder what the advantage is to just adding another
            > layer of plywood to the bottom with heavier glass? I guess the answer
            > obviously is that steel is heavier and has more abrasion resistance.
            >
            > I am not convinced it won't rust in fresh water, but there are barrier
            > coats that can protect it.
            >
            > I guess my main concern is first getting it bent properly to match the
            > hull rocker and then trimmed to the bilge interface. Then attaching and
            > sealing it to the plywood bottom with no chance of rot invading it. The
            > two materials have different expansion/contraction coefficients, plus
            > there are all those screw holes that require sealing. So a sealant like
            > 3M5200 would have to be used and maybe tighten the screws so it squeezes
            > out to seal the holes?
            >
            > Then the heavier hull has to be turned upright, wheras installing an
            > extra plywood layer and then some addtional internal iron ballast can be
            > done after it is flipped, and is protected from water inside the hull
            > and can be relocated for best balance.
            >
            > So far as I know this has never been accepted as an option, which also
            > makes me wonder why not?
            >
            > With all respect, Susanne Altenburger is a terrific engineer. But has
            > she ever actually built a boat? Two of her designs have been less than
            > successful in actual usage. But that is not relevant to this group as
            > they were quite a lot larger than most of us are looking into.
            >
            > Nels
            >
            > >
            > > I wanted to comment on the cost of the steel plate bottoms for
            > sharpies.
            > >
            > > I have not built a sharpie, much less one with a steel plate bottom as
            > ballast. I do however think it is a great idea on so many fronts. A
            > year or more ago, I purchased plans for the Bolger AS29, and 39. I also
            > received with the AS29 plans some Bolger "updates" including some very
            > interesting info on insulating, and steel plate ballast.
            > >
            > > While "researching" costs for the boat project, I asked my local metal
            > work guy (owns a metalworking business) about the cost of using steel
            > plate as ballast. In a nutshell, I thought it was cheap, actually
            > cheaper than I had imagined. The steel plate is very cheap, you
            > basically pay a commodity price for it. The shipping of the plate is
            > what will cost you, often more than the product itself. My friend said
            > if I could wait until he batched an order (bi-monthly), the shipping
            > cost would be less.
            > >
            > > The cost of cutting the plate, grinding the edges, and drilling the
            > holes is done by the hour, but would not take long. Bending would take
            > just minutes on the press.
            > >
            > > I did not get an estimate on galvanizing. On a trailer boat it would
            > not be needed. I can't imagine ballast on a Michalak boat being more
            > than a few hundred US. Now if you can do something for free, any price
            > is expensive, but I really felt the steel plate was cheap. Now compare
            > that to lead. Yeah sure it "may" be free, if you chase it down, but
            > your going to have to buy stuff and really mess with it to get it to do
            > what you want (IE, melting, casting, etc). There is a cost of time, and
            > money there too.
            > >
            > > Again, no argument, just pointing out that steel plate is (from a
            > mechanical perspective) fairly cheap and easy.
            > >
            > > Have a wonderful weekend everyone!
            > >
            > >
            > > Chris
            > >
            >





            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • luke_seubert
            Oh yes, I have seen and studied that photo quite carefully. And yes, it does show a Micro type cargo hold underneath the cockpit deck. However, that is also a
            Message 5 of 29 , Aug 6, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              Oh yes, I have seen and studied that photo quite carefully. And yes, it does show a Micro type cargo hold underneath the cockpit deck.

              However, that is also a photo of a partially completed boat. I was not sure if that was showing a test fitting of the cockpit deck, with further work to come, including installation of a footwell tub. That is why I posted the questions that I did about that structure. Basically, I was trying very hard to avoid making an assumption.

              But now, my confusion is cleared up. Please refer to my next post in this thread.

              Cheers,
              Luke

              --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, Alan Shapcott <logicaid@...> wrote:
              >
              > Hi,
              > Have you not seen this picture which shows the arrangement very well...? I believe this is essentially the same as a Bolger Micro. Nels?
              > I hasten to add that I know only what I have seen on the net and in Bolger's books with regards to both these designs!!
              > http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/4738692/sn/1417607285/name/10_All+done+and+waiting+for+the+paint+job.jpg
              > Cheers,
              > Alan.
              >
              > --- On Fri, 6/8/10, luke_seubert <luke_seubert@...> wrote:
              >
              > From: luke_seubert <luke_seubert@...>
              > Subject: [Michalak] Re: Reply: Is the Blobster suitable for Cheasapeake Bay cruising?
              > To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
              > Date: Friday, 6, August, 2010, 4:08 PM
              >
              >
              >
              > --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "prairiedog2332" <nelsarv@> wrote:
              > >
              > > I will try to clarify things a bit from my perspective.
              > >
              > > I think the cockpit/aft deck on the Blobster is the same as on Viola 22
              > > for which Jim says:
              > >
              > > "Aft of the cabin is a large flat cockpit with great storage
              > > underneath which is accessible from both the cockpit and
              > > from the cabin. One trip on a Micro will show you what
              > > a wonderful setup this is. Best of all, this type of deck
              > > is very quick and easy to build."
              > >
              > > http://www.duckworksbbs.com/plans/jim/viola22/index.htm
              > >
              > I think, but am not sure, that the cockpit/aft deck of Blobster is a bit different from Viola. Viola has a substantial aft "buoyancy box", from the looks of it. Blobster might have a thin one, but it does have a small wet well. Now the deck and footwell parts of the cockpit might be very similar between Viola and Blobster.
              >
              > By the way, to clarify a point of confusion. The structure I refer to as "benches" is the part of the cockpit running along the port and starboard sides, where one usually sits. I know it isn't a "bench" in the conventional sense, but I use the term to distinguish these areas from the center of the cockpit, which is occupied by covered deck, open footwell, and then covered deck.
              >
              > What I do not understand about the Blobster cockpit design, is the footwell area. That is the source of my confusion. If I could get a proper description, or some photos, then I would understand it better.
              >
              > > You might also notice the scuppers in the sides immediately aft the main
              > > bulkhead. I would not make them too small as they can get plugged with
              > > leaves etc., if the boat is stored outside and it storms, allowing
              > > rainwater to lie on the deck. and could lead to the paint lifting or
              > > bubbling.
              > >
              > > No need ever for a bilge pump with that setup. A sponge at most!
              > >
              > So long as the footwell hatch is in place. If the footwell hatch is removed while sailing, the footwell is exposed and water can get in there. Now, that need not be a large problem, depending on the design - which, as I stated above, I don't fully understand at this point.
              >
              >
              > > A fellow from OZ has built two Micros, one with the builder requiring a
              > > self-draining cockpit which he did but only because he was ordered to. I
              > > guess it depends on personal preference.  If I was going to have one I
              > > would want a cover over it if stored outside and give up the extra
              > > storage space below - which is amazing in a Micro - as you can crawl
              > > right inside from the cabin. With a self-draining cockpit you only have
              > > two narrow storage accesses on each side and a bit under the well. One
              > > Micro owner installed two deadlights in the sides of the hold and his
              > > kids slept there and used it as a playpen:-)
              > >
              > I understand and appreciate all the storage space, potential storage space, that exists underneath the cockpit deck. One can place an enormous amount of stuff in there, and it can also serve as a large watertight volume with lots of positive buoyancy. These are all good things.
              >
              >
              > > Inner window panels could be removable if they seep. Actually I like the
              > > wiley port design that can be opened of closed right off with some foam
              > > bits. Will try to upload a file on it.
              > >
              > Please post a message if you are able to upload the file - I would like to see it. Thanks.
              >
              >
              > > I looked hard and long into electric as well. Gets very complicated and
              > > expensive  if done to have reliable recharging capability. Even have a
              > > small genset I could use, but you have to carry gas for it anyway. To
              > > get shore power for recharging, means staying at marinas instead of
              > > stopping anywhere you prefer. I have a professional background in both
              > > wind and solar power and neither option works that well in a sheltered
              > > anchorage. Solar panels are much overrated as to their actual
              > > performance.  Even the best deep-cycle batteries can not be discharged
              > > more than 50 percent or so without risking damage.  A 5 liter gas tank
              > > will out-last 100 lb of batteries in my view and are a lot easier to
              > > replenish.
              > >
              > Technologically, we are getting close to really efficient solar panels and really power dense batteries, but we aren't quite there yet - unless you want to pay a lot of money, that is. There are some early prototype airplanes - reconnaissance aircraft mostly - which use solar panels on the wings and batteries to stay aloft for extended periods. That technology will trickle down and drop in cost eventually, at which time, electric-solar boats will become more practical, especially if they include a wind generator.
              >
              > But yeah, I think you are right - right now, solar-electric for main propulsion doesn't work. As supplemental propulsion? Hmm, possibly. Right now, gas motors are cheaper. But solar panels and batteries should suffice for navigation, communication, and audio systems.
              >
              > Cheers,
              > Luke
              >
              >
              >
              > ------------------------------------
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
            • luke_seubert
              Thank you Alan. I did find the photo you mentioned. It was this one: http://tinyurl.com/38zh92h I now much more clearly understand what is going on underneath
              Message 6 of 29 , Aug 6, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                Thank you Alan. I did find the photo you mentioned. It was this one:
                http://tinyurl.com/38zh92h

                I now much more clearly understand what is going on underneath the cockpit deck of Micro, and I am quite sure Blobster as well. So my confusion is now clarity. Thanks all.

                As for sleeping down there - well, little people might like it, but not me :-) I'll sleep in the cabin.

                Cheers,
                Luke

                --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, Alan Shapcott <logicaid@...> wrote:
                >
                > Hello Luke,
                > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Michalak/photos/album/1820081684/pic/list
                > One of these pictures shows Nels' Micro under-the-cockpit hold area. Its all just a completely open area under the flat cockpit. There is no seperate footwell as such, just the hatch opening. I imagine it would be pleasant to sleep below here with the hatch-cover open in warm weather....
                > Alan.
                >
              • gusarbrac
                Hi, I ve bought plans for Blobster and will be building one this winter in Canada. I haven t found a lot of other Blobster info on the web except yours. Is
                Message 7 of 29 , Oct 24, 2014
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hi, 

                  I've bought plans for Blobster and will be building one this winter in Canada.  I haven't found a lot of other Blobster info on the web except yours.  Is yours still the only one built?

                  Cheers, 

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