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

67699Re: [bolger] Re: Wish2 SketchUp (was SketchUp Chebacco)

Expand Messages
  • Stefan Topolski
    Apr 27, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      I don't understand why we don't make the logical leap from these criteria - go above and beyond the conclusion of a narrow hull - wider square boat - trailered - own lifeboat- fun daysailer - unsinkable... and you end up with a multihull.

      The first and farthest ocean going vessels - shoal draft - safer - faster - much more stable - own-life-boats...  setting aside hull construction time and cost [which are not mentioned strongly in the prior post] this becomes the logical conclusion of the logic Bolger has shared with us.


      Now if you are talking looks (in the eye of the beholder) or tradition (each to his own again) that's another story.  But those arguments lack logic, and the poster did not wax long about aesthetics in their post.

      .... i'd still rig it Bolger Chebacco style - wide and low and sticking off both ends ...

      All the Best,
      Stefan

      "One gathers peace as a feather in the palm of one's hand."    -anonymous

      Stefan Topolski  MD
      Assist. Professor, U. of Massachusetts Medical School
      Clinical Instructor, U. of New England
      Founder and Director of
      Caring in Community, Inc.  501(c)3
      1105 Mohawk Trail
      Shelburne Falls, Ma.





      Il giorno abr 22, 2012, alle ore 12:42 pm, John ha scritto:

       



      Thanks everyone for all the kind comments, and sorry to take so long to get back to you ("on the road again...").

      You're right about the 'not intolerable.' But I kind of feel that most crews and skippers can have a fine ol' time out on the water not even noticing they're dragging the stern around all day. But they will certainly notice sailing on their ear all day long! And the boat is so high and narrow that climbing up to windward in a breeze will hardly help at all. To me that's a huge issue.

      I'm drawn to Wish II for it's potential as an ocean going trailer sailor. High and narrow, translates to potentially excellent ultimate stability. I'd go with water ballast, making it unsinkable without relying on flotation, so serving as it's own lifeboat. Ballast tanks take up space, but could conceivably be engineered to serve as storage of canned goods and heavy consumables and replaced with water when used. Bonus: lighter on the trailer.

      But...I'd like to have a boat that could also be a fun daysailor, with other people aboard, so I'm thinking of going whole hog and designing my own, using Wish II as a baseline. Present thinking: go longer, 22' on only a few hundred pounds more displacement, mostly as more ballast (water). Longer gives more stability and eases the fore and aft trim issue. An inch or so wider, maybe (narrow means fast, all else being equal, and I like that about Wish II and sharpies in general). Open up the bow to make it a square boat. (Better initial stability) Inboard the rudder and center everything up back aft as in Chebacco, with cut out transom for an outboard. I'd also like to arc the bottom for additional strength and also to ease the hard chine. Speed again. (I don't need it to be an 'instant boat.') With water ballast tanks taking up space anyway, a centerboard trunk at that point may prove reasonably unobtrusive.

      It's all dream stuff for now. A host of real life issues press. That's what's fun about Sketchup. Cheap build!
      John

      --- In bolger@yahoogroups.com, "c.ruzer" <c.ruzer@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      >
      > John, a note about the "too narrow" comment displayed for the 'Wish II' model (a personal favourite design). I like your models' looks and will download the program just to view, thanks.
      >
      > - I'm always going back to Wish for some new idea or other. The latest is flush deck aft, no cockpit, inside control, a captain's chair, a small central only slightly raised house... it's something after a much modified distance cruising Martha Jane I saw once and a smaller Michalak's Robbsboat. An inch or four deeper immersion than the waterline shown on the drawings ups the storeage self-sufficiency for good "stay out" cruising range along coasts with few opportunities for reprovisioning or watering... steel bottom plating/increased stores/big tidal runs.
      >
      > About: "He thought it was "plain ugly," too narrow given the high freeboard for live ballast (warm bodies) topside to do much good,"
      >
      > Narrowness wasn't the particular problem (18 ply sheets), trim was.
      >
      > Location of crew weight too aft due to placement of the cockpit in relation to centre of bouyancy was. That is, it wasn't athwartships stability, rather it was for 'n aft trim. Hence two of the four crew to sail below decks forward, but even with only two crew their location in the cockpit was still not ideal (yet i've always supposed gear and stores could be placed forward to trim in that case).
      >
      > The steel ballast quantum made the high freeboard not "intolerable", even if not "good".
      >


    • Show all 26 messages in this topic