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

68161Re: 34' Economy Seagoing Cruiser - not even one image on web! (30 Odd Boats)

Expand Messages
  • c.ruzer
    Jun 13, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      En garde!

      --- 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."

      Au contraire, whatever else could the idea possibly be other than what it is said to be as it is stated? C'est une très bonne idée!


      > Not the same as less draft.

      Methinks that's mistaken. Bolger being viscerally joined to shoal draft not withstanding, what acceptable alternative conception is there?


      Allez, c'est parti!


      > 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.

      LM2 a 5:1 stiffness ratio? Not at all!

      LM2 @ 10604lbs displacement : 2998lbs ballast = 3.53:1
      AS29 @ 7300lbs displacement : 2000lbs ballast = 3.65:1
      AS19 @ 2100lbs displacement : 500lbs ballast = 4.20:1
      Eeek!lt @ 280lbs displacement : 40lbs ballast = 7.00:1
      Eeek! @ 280lbs displacement : 75lbs ballast = 3.73:1
      Anhinga @ 2400lbs displacement : 435lbs ballast = 5.51:1
      ESC lt @ 8300lbs displacement :(1200lbs?ballast) = ??????
      ESC @ 8300lbs displacement :(2240lbs?ballast) = ??????


      Rather it's ballast versus draft on beam for length on displacement for more ballast on similar draft,

      LM2 @ 94.8" beam : 12" draft = 7.90:1
      AS29 @ 94.0" beam : 13" draft = 7.23:1
      AS19 @ 66.0" beam : 8" draft = 8.25:1
      Eeek! @ 24.0" beam : 4" draft = 6.00:1
      Anhinga @ 60.0" beam : 7" draft = 8.57:1
      ESC @ 78.0" beam : 13.5" draft = 5.78:1

      LM2 @ 452.4" LOA : 94.8" beam = 4.77:1
      AS29 @ 354.0" LOA : 94.0" beam = 3.76:1
      AS19 @ 234.0" LOA : 66.0" beam = 3.54:1
      Eeek! @ 138.0" LOA : 24.0" beam = 5.75:1
      Anhinga @ 279.0" LOA : 60.0" beam = 4.65:1
      ESC @ 414.0" LOA : 78.0" beam = 5.30:1

      the corollary being for similar displacement on less draft. Altered field contours and markings with same rules: a different game.

      Voilà.



      > 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