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

68160Re: [bolger] Re: 34' Economy Seagoing Cruiser - not even one image on web! (30 Odd Boats)

Expand Messages
  • Mark Albanese
    Jun 13, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Standing by paragraph one pending more detailed objection.

      My take on the LM2 ballast was definitely wrong. Further study shows 860 kg each, port and starboard. That's 3000#, just as Bob clarified,  ton and a half of some kind. Against the on her lines displacement of  4.81M3 ( 11,000 pounds ) not heavily ballasted at all.
      On Jun 13, 2012, at 8:02 PM, c.ruzer wrote:

      Au contraire!

      --- In bolger@yahoogroups.com, Mark Albanese <marka97203@...> wrote:
      > That was not the idea. "I had the notion that a pointed stern without
      > rocker would allow more ballast to be carried without increasing the
      > size of the midsection." Not the same as less draft.
      > Though larger over all, LM2 is an interesting contrast. I make the
      > ballast required for him at 1900 of a total displacement of 11,000
      > pounds, about a 5:1 ratio that's a lot less than what you've shown
      > the Eeek! shaped boats to need.
      > On Jun 8, 2012, at 7:47 AM, c.ruzer wrote:
      > > ... so too much draft defeating the original idea of same
      > > displacement on less immersed cross-section, ie. less draft?

    • Show all 13 messages in this topic