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

Re: [bolger] Safety of ballasted vs. unballasted open boats

Expand Messages
  • GHC
    Well, on one point, at least here in the USA you are bound to make any vessel under 21 feet float when swamped. Of course, we don t get too many Coast Guard
    Message 1 of 5 , Aug 1, 2000
      Well, on one point, at least here in the USA you are bound to make any
      vessel under 21 feet float when swamped. Of course, we don't get too many
      Coast Guard inspections here in OK., but both those boats must be made to
      float...

      Gregg Carlson

      At 07:35 PM 8/1/2000 -0000, you wrote:
      >I am considering building either a Bolger designed Chebacco or a
      >Nigel
      >Irens Romilly for my next boat building project. They have a number
      >of similarities:
      >
      >- Similar LWL (19 to 19.5 ft.)
      >- Large day sailing cockpit (9 to 10 ft.)
      >- Small cuddy cabin (6 to 7 ft.)
      >- Centerboard with shallow keel.
      >- Strip plank construction, although Chebacco is deigned for other
      >methods also.
      >- Unstayed cat-yawl rig, although Romilly is a lug and Chebacco is a
      >gaff.
      >- Built in accommodation for an outboard motor.
      >
      >The one major difference is that the Chebacco is unballasted, relying
      >on form and crew weight for stability, whereas the Romilly has about
      >1300 pounds of lead ballast.
      >
      >My question pertains to the safety inherent in these two approaches
      >to
      >stability in a basically open boat. My first thought was that the
      >ballasted Romilly would be less susceptible to capsize and thus
      >"safer". (I know Phil Bolger and Bill Samson, the editor of the
      >Chebacco News say no Chebacco has ever capsized, butÂ…) On
      >further
      >thought, at least if the unballasted Chebacco capsized it would still
      >be floating, however, I would think, that the Romilly with 1300
      >pounds
      >of ballast and a 10 foot long non-self bailing cockpit would sink if
      >swamped.
      >
      >I was wondering what this group thought about the safety aspect of
      >these two approaches. Keep in mind that I am not proposing that the
      >boat purposely be taken out in conditions where this is a concern,
      >but
      >unexpected and unpredictable things can happen. Should you get
      >caught
      >in conditions that stretch the capabilities of the boat, which would
      >you rather be in - an unballasted Chebacco or a ballasted Romilly?
      >
      >Thanks,
      >
      >Ralph Wight
      >
      >
      >Bolger rules!!!
      >- no cursing
      >- stay on topic
      >- use punctuation
      >- add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts
      >- add some content: send "thanks!" and "ditto!" posts off-list.
      >
      >
    • Chris Crandall
      ... Despite the apparent similarities, these are very different boats. Chebacco is explicitly designed to be easy to build--Romilly is not. Strip-plank
      Message 2 of 5 , Aug 1, 2000
        On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Ralph Wight wrote:

        > I am considering building either a Bolger designed Chebacco or a Nigel
        > Irens Romilly for my next boat building project. They have a number
        > of similarities:

        Despite the apparent similarities, these are very different boats.
        Chebacco is explicitly designed to be easy to build--Romilly is not.

        Strip-plank construction is SLOW. Chebacco is designed for
        plywood--either clinker/lapstrake or stitch and glue.

        Romilly is substantially leas beamy than Chebacco, if memory serves.
        That's why it needs the ballast, rather than relying on form.

        I'll bet Romilly will take 2-3 times as long to build, cost substantially
        more, sail faster, have less room below (compare cubic feet of interior),
        and will have substantially less support, either on the Net, or from pals.

        In sum--they're different boats, and Chebacco is easier on almost every
        dimension. Except speed.


        Chris Crandall crandall@... (785) 864-4131
        Department of Psychology University of Kansas Lawrence, KS 66045
        I have data convincingly disconfirming the Duhem-Quine hypothesis.
      • Peter Vanderwaart
        ... You pose a very interesting questions, especially since the Romilly was designed (I suppose) for English weather (windy) and Chebacco for USA weather
        Message 3 of 5 , Aug 1, 2000
          > I am considering building either a Bolger designed Chebacco or a
          > Nigel
          > Irens Romilly for my next boat building project.

          You pose a very interesting questions, especially since the Romilly
          was designed (I suppose) for English weather (windy) and Chebacco for
          USA weather (calm). I think that for comfort and pleasure in sailing
          there may be an arguement for each in her home waters. However, you
          asked about safety.

          I think without a doubt that operator skill is a very important part
          of safety in any open boat. If, in heavy weather, Romilly has an
          easier motion, then her crew may make fewer mistakes, and bad
          accidents would be rarer. I think it is probably true that in REALLY,
          REALLY bad weather, Chebacco may by thrown around out of control in
          conditions where Romilly can still cope.

          But, if a bad accident happens, I think you are probably better off
          with Chebacco.

          Peter
        • Ralph Wight
          ... Chris, That just means it will be that much sooner that I have to figure out what to build next. :-) Heck, I m only half done with my current boat and I am
          Message 4 of 5 , Aug 2, 2000
            --- In bolger@egroups.com, Chris Crandall <crandall@u...> wrote:

            > I'll bet Romilly will take 2-3 times as long to build,

            Chris,
            That just means it will be that much sooner that I have to figure out
            what to build next. :-) Heck, I'm only half done with my current boat
            and I am trying to figure out what I want to build next.

            Ralph Wight (looking for a Boat Builders Anonymous group)
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.