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

AF4B Fiasco now maybe a Twister

Expand Messages
  • woldwilly
    Hi, Well last fall I purchased the AF4B plans, and started in on it. Well wife got ill, spent some time in the hospital, and then needed back surgery. The
    Message 1 of 8 , Apr 4, 2014

      Hi,

      Well last fall  I purchased the AF4B plans, and started in on it. Well wife got ill, spent some time in the hospital, and then needed back surgery. The boat start was about 33% , and I thought well tarped in the back. ( I have no official inside place to work on a boat) There was over a month that I didn't even open the back door. When I finally went out there, I found the tarp had ripped a little and let water in. Ah what a mess. The whole boat was one big fuzzy mold, in fact it looked like someone had painted it flat black.. So I donned gloves and resperator and lets just say the pieces of boat are in a landfill. I purchased more material to try again...

      I've always been fond of the Garvey style, that why when I started looking at other Michalak's designs, and the article in his newsletter of someone building one, it struck me as a better alternative for me anyway. I haven't been much of a sailor, Though I worked at a fiberglass production shop building sailboats for 7 years in my youth, and I've sailed a few times, it just doesn't appeal to me. So as the Twister is a sailing boat, but can be used just as well motorized as the article says, I've been staring at the plans and seeing the pronounced rear rocker similar to a rowing boat, I was contemplating dropping the rocker to more of a planning flat hull in the stern. While I'm at it, I could raise the cabin and sides of the boat slightly, because in the drawings, it shows the material left over from cutting the sides out is used for making the leeboard and the rudder, which I would not need, so there wouldn't be any additional material needed. The boat reminds me a lot of an old Atkins boat I was fond of as a kid sitting in Dad's attic looking thru old magazines and plans. Of course the Atkins "Barneget" was a 23 foot Sedan Garvey with an inboard and you sat inside the cabin and steered, but the lines are similar. I would leave the cabin similar to original with the way to walk thru to the bow..

      I have a 2 stroke 15 HP Long Shaft electric start, no tiller, remote forward controls. That is the one I've been wanting to use for my next boat. It weighs about 91 pounds, plus battery and tank. So some kind of forward steering, either a Ezy-Glide stick or a regular wheel, or something.. I don't want to sit in the back anyway because of my added 80 pounds from my younger years would do better a little further forward...

      Any thoughts welcome, plus if anyone knows a similar design more closely resembling the mods I am thinking on Jim's boat, I'd like to hear about it.  Willy in Astoria, OR

    • Joseph Stromski
      Those sound like reasonable and easily made modifications. If you could go a few feet longer the Hapscut would be a viable option. Sows Ear has been nicely
      Message 2 of 8 , Apr 4, 2014
        Those sound like reasonable and easily made modifications. If you could go a few feet longer the Hapscut would be a viable option. Sows Ear has been nicely proven out as well. The "Otter" version is nicely done, but doesnt really resemble a garvey much. 
        Morten Oleson's 15' Dutch pram also seems similar to what you're proposing, but also seems to be a semi-displacement hull, so you'd still face modifications if planing is part of the requirements:
        http://www.boatplans.dk/boat_plans.asp?id=4

        Best,
        Joe




        From: "woldwilly@..." <woldwilly@...>
        To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Friday, April 4, 2014 2:14 PM
        Subject: [Michalak] AF4B Fiasco now maybe a Twister

         
        Hi,
        Well last fall  I purchased the AF4B plans, and started in on it. Well wife got ill, spent some time in the hospital, and then needed back surgery. The boat start was about 33% , and I thought well tarped in the back. ( I have no official inside place to work on a boat) There was over a month that I didn't even open the back door. When I finally went out there, I found the tarp had ripped a little and let water in. Ah what a mess. The whole boat was one big fuzzy mold, in fact it looked like someone had painted it flat black.. So I donned gloves and resperator and lets just say the pieces of boat are in a landfill. I purchased more material to try again...
        I've always been fond of the Garvey style, that why when I started looking at other Michalak's designs, and the article in his newsletter of someone building one, it struck me as a better alternative for me anyway. I haven't been much of a sailor, Though I worked at a fiberglass production shop building sailboats for 7 years in my youth, and I've sailed a few times, it just doesn't appeal to me. So as the Twister is a sailing boat, but can be used just as well motorized as the article says, I've been staring at the plans and seeing the pronounced rear rocker similar to a rowing boat, I was contemplating dropping the rocker to more of a planning flat hull in the stern. While I'm at it, I could raise the cabin and sides of the boat slightly, because in the drawings, it shows the material left over from cutting the sides out is used for making the leeboard and the rudder, which I would not need, so there wouldn't be any additional material needed. The boat reminds me a lot of an old Atkins boat I was fond of as a kid sitting in Dad's attic looking thru old magazines and plans. Of course the Atkins "Barneget" was a 23 foot Sedan Garvey with an inboard and you sat inside the cabin and steered, but the lines are similar. I would leave the cabin similar to original with the way to walk thru to the bow..
        I have a 2 stroke 15 HP Long Shaft electric start, no tiller, remote forward controls. That is the one I've been wanting to use for my next boat. It weighs about 91 pounds, plus battery and tank. So some kind of forward steering, either a Ezy-Glide stick or a regular wheel, or something.. I don't want to sit in the back anyway because of my added 80 pounds from my younger years would do better a little further forward...
        Any thoughts welcome, plus if anyone knows a similar design more closely resembling the mods I am thinking on Jim's boat, I'd like to hear about it.  Willy in Astoria, OR


      • woldwilly
        Thanks for the info. I will look into those. I really do not need to plane, just I wanted to be as efficient as I could considering the 15 HP is the motor I
        Message 3 of 8 , Apr 5, 2014
          Thanks for the info. I will look into those. I really do not "need" to plane, just I wanted to be as efficient as I could considering the 15 HP is the motor I was going to use, and thought that perhaps a boat closer to a planning hull would at least attempt to plane  or go faster easier than pushing a displacement hull no matter how hard you do that.. WW
        • sirdarnell
          I displacement hull at displacement speeds is more efficient than a planing hull at any speed, assuming similiarly sized boats.
          Message 4 of 8 , Apr 7, 2014
            I displacement hull at displacement speeds is more efficient than a planing hull at any speed, assuming similiarly sized boats.
          • jmichalsbrown
            I displacement hull at displacement speeds is more efficient than a planing hull at any speed, assuming similiarly sized boats. No, because a displacement
            Message 5 of 8 , Apr 8, 2014
              "I displacement hull at displacement speeds is more efficient than a planing hull at any speed, assuming similiarly sized boats."

              No, because a displacement hull  consumes rapidly increasing amounts of power as its speed exceeds hull speed for its length.  This is because its bow wave becomes longer than the hull so the stern drops into the trough its bow wave, leaving the boat trying to "climb uphill."  A planing hull generates lift that allows it to exceed normal hull speed without such a penalty.  Of course, the planing hull, with its flat run aft, has its transom submerged at lower speeds, making it inefficient at these speeds.  Each is more efficient in its own realm.
            • daniel brown
              yes, you blew off the premise that the displacement hull boat was travelling at hull speed. To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com From: JMichalsbr@aol.com Date: Tue, 8
              Message 6 of 8 , Apr 8, 2014

                yes, you blew off the premise that the displacement hull boat was travelling at hull speed.

                To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
                From: JMichalsbr@...
                Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 13:17:30 -0700
                Subject: Re: [Michalak] AF4B Fiasco now maybe a Twister

                 
                "I displacement hull at displacement speeds is more efficient than a planing hull at any speed, assuming similiarly sized boats."

                No, because a displacement hull  consumes rapidly increasing amounts of power as its speed exceeds hull speed for its length.  This is because its bow wave becomes longer than the hull so the stern drops into the trough its bow wave, leaving the boat trying to "climb uphill."  A planing hull generates lift that allows it to exceed normal hull speed without such a penalty.  Of course, the planing hull, with its flat run aft, has its transom submerged at lower speeds, making it inefficient at these speeds.  Each is more efficient in its own realm.
              • John Kohnen
                As long as you ve already got the 15, there s nothing wrong with having too much power in a displacement boat, as long as the engine weight isn t too much for
                Message 7 of 8 , Apr 8, 2014
                  As long as you've already got the 15, there's nothing wrong with having
                  too much power in a displacement boat, as long as the engine weight isn't
                  too much for the design. That's a 4-stroke, right? It'll be quite happy
                  tootling along throttled back for a nice cruising speed a bit less than
                  "hull speed," and it'll real comfortable to live with as it loafs along.
                  The extra power might come in handy for emergency brakes and maneuvering.
                  Of course if you open her up and try to go much past "hull speed" you
                  might make a wake as big as those overpowered trawler yachts you see
                  farther up the Columbia. <g>

                  On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 23:27:49 -0700, Willy in Astoria wrote:

                  > Thanks for the info. I will look into those. I really do not "need" to
                  > plane, just I wanted to be as efficient as I could considering the 15 HP
                  > is the motor I was going to use, and thought that perhaps a boat closer
                  > to a planning hull would at least attempt to plane or go faster easier
                  > than pushing a displacement hull no matter how hard you do that.. WW

                  --
                  John (jkohnen@...)
                  Patience! Patience! Patience is the invention of dullards and sluggards.
                  In a well-regulated world there should be no need of such a thing as
                  patience. (Grace King)
                • woldwilly
                  Ok, my outboard is a 1994 Evinrude 2 stroke 15HP, Long Shaft. Electric Start. Does not have a tiller handle, has forward controls. So we re talking 90 pounds
                  Message 8 of 8 , Apr 9, 2014

                    Ok, my outboard is a 1994 Evinrude 2 stroke 15HP, Long Shaft. Electric Start. Does not have a tiller handle, has forward controls. So we're talking 90 pounds at the max, even less maybe because a short shaft pull start is supposed to weight 76 pounds; I was just adding the weight of the starter and extension, minus a tiller handle.

                    My weight has gone up about 80 pounds over my youthful weight so maybe they offset each other over having a 4 stroke...

                    I actually at one time had two of those, matching twins I had been hanging onto in the idea I was going to build a barge/scow and have the twins for the maneuverability, but figured downsizing and selling off one of those would almost totally pay for the build. For the time I have left, I figure I'll contribute to the environment I 'm gone.

                    November 2012 Splash on Duckworks shows a Twister just launched without the sailing rigging with an outboard of not very big size and looks great, and seems to be going along at a fair speed, and built as designed. Anyhow that's a phrase I've been avoiding on my last 5 builds. I just can't seem to leave things alone..

                    But today I have another interesting "dilemma" if you want to call it that. I have someone bringing a West Wight Potter 14 over to possibly do some "horse trading" for my 12 foot Columbian with an 8HP and trailer.. Pictures he sent me show an original low sail number (under 300). Says it needs some minor wood work. Hummm, just about everyone has a different opinion of "easy", or " minor", so I'll be sure to look closely as to what his opinion of that  is. If I go thru with the trade, wife has been saying just get a  small boat with a cabin, get out there on the water and quit spending time spinning your wheels, so that might stop the Twister build; at least for now. But I haven't been in a sailboat with the sails up since 1984.. WW

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