30' plywood sharpie [Archive] - Page 3

PAR

02-04-2011, 08:41 AM

I use the stub keel trick all the time on shoal draft designs. Though the NIS shown does appear to have a "slice 'o pie" style centerboard, which intrudes more, the stub keel can greatly clean up a yacht's interior. In many designs, you can lose the centerboard case under the sole completely. In a flat bottom boat, where bilge depth is at a premium, this is even more important. This keel stub can carry a substantial potion of the yachts's ballast, which is a good thing for it's stability curve and lastly, even though the appendage is low aspect, it is effective enough to offer leeward resistance, even with the board up. Of course you do lose some of the shoal nature of the hull form as RWatson mentions, but she appears to be fairly shoal still. My point is what is the difference between a hull that draws 10" without the stub keel and 20" with it. Calf high water or knee high water is about it and this isn't enough to get excited about, considering the advantage of housing the majority of the board, if not all of it, below the sole.

In terms of Angélique's design, I'd use more "appendage" housing then previously shown and also concentrate on getting the leading edge slope right. One of the most difficult things to live with on this style of hull, is the damn centerboard case and it's intrusion into the cabin spaces. One way around this is the stub keel, but another effective technique is to use a higher aspect board and use the forward end of the board, instead of the after end as done in a slice 'o pie style, to resist twisting. This means the forward end of the case needs additional support, compared to the slice 'o pie arrangement, but I've found it's much more effective at reducing it's internal foot print and you get a better plan form on the board itself too, for a free preformance boost, just for making the design change.

Angélique

02-04-2011, 11:22 AM

PAR, as always a very informative and valuable contribution http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/images/icons/icon14.gif http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/images/icons/icon14.gif

But . . .

In terms of Angélique's design....

Thanks, but it's Michel's.... (http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/profile/luckystrike.html)

Glad you're back on the forum and on this thread..!!

Cheers :)
Angel

PS [....] draws 10" with the stub keel and 20" with it.

I guess you meant... ‘‘draws 10" without the stub keel and 20" with it’’ . . ? ?

Angélique

02-04-2011, 12:39 PM

Would it help to lower the drag of the stub keel if it was not flat on the underside but has a NACA shape all around..?? (except the topside of course which is against the bottom of the boat)

And would it still be able to provide some leeward resistance when the board is up..??

53426

Picture is just an example of the form and is a plug of something completely different. For the stub keel form I meant it should be narrower and extended on the aft side till the hight and width are zero.

Cheers,
Angel

wardd

02-04-2011, 12:42 PM

why not lee boards like the bolger As-29?

relatively unobtrusive inside and a flat bottom

Angélique

02-04-2011, 12:59 PM

why not lee boards like the bolger As-29?

relatively unobtrusive inside and a flat bottom

AS29 is a centerboarder, aren't you confused with an other Bolger design or a modification..?

http://www.leow.de/a_as29gy1.gif http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/as29nash.jpg
Bolger AS29 (http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/as192939.htm#as29)

Cheers,
Angel

PS - just saw... it are twin swing-keels which are actually enclosed leeboards.

hoytedow

02-04-2011, 01:00 PM

Would it help to lower the drag of the stub keel if it was not flat on the underside but has a NACA shape all around..?? (except the topside of course which is against the bottom of the boat)

And would it still be able to provide some leeward resistance when the board is up..??

http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/attachments/boat-design/53426d1296844558-30-plywood-sharpie-_example_of_stump_keel_plug_.jpg

Picture is just an example of the form and is a plug of something completely different. For the stub keel form I meant it should be extended on the aft side till the hight and width are zero.

Cheers,
AngelI like it. It brings to mind a remora.

Angélique

02-04-2011, 03:22 PM

I like it. It brings to mind a remora.

Hmm yes, I think Remora's are designed for minimum drag on their host...

53430

Cheers :)
Angel

PAR

02-04-2011, 06:16 PM

Thanks for the catch Angel, yes, it was supposed to say "without" and is now fixed.

Bulbs don't lower drag, they raise it. Unless you can gain significant depth, so the weight of the bulb can dramatically affect the stability curve, they aren't worth installing, particularly on a shoal fin. The best thing you could do to a fin like that on the 40' NIS, is employ a "Skeel" effects lower edge or even simplier just a small end plate, say an 1" or so off the lower edge of the fin. Think of this as a aluminum plate, just a tad bigger then the bottom of the fin, of course attached to the bottom of it. It'll help with pressure bleed off and make the fin act like it's deeper.

Leeboards really are effective, but they clutter up the sides of a boat terribly. Twin center/daggerboards can be hidden in furniture in a 40' design, but frankly are a bit of a contrivance, unless looking for the last ounce of ability from the design in a shoal format.

luckystrike

02-08-2011, 01:15 PM

It looks like your scale model is around 1/10th.

I had real trouble getting weights for radio control right at anything under 1/5th, and even that wont give me proper sailing performance evaluation.

Your design appears to be almost a 'Norwalk Island Sharpie', where they already have proven designs and building methods, so I am not sure what features you are incorporating in a whole new design to justify all the effort you have ahead of you.

Hello Ray,
many things have been said by PAR and Angelique and they are correct, I just want directly explain what my thoughts are for this design.

All the effort:
No big deal, designing boats is my wintertime leisure activity (hobby). Until now is not planned that the my design will be built as a "real boat" as I have other preferences for sailing boats, much more racier. I'am just fascinated by sharpies. Anyway, building a sharpie don't need special building methods, its all standart plywood and epoxy.

Model:
Yes, you are right, my model is 1/10th scale. For us "Metrics" its the logical choice, because we are thinking 1/10ths, sail areas shrink a 1/100th and volume/wheight a 1/1000th. Very easy to calculate, just take gr. for kg.

I have no problems with the wheight of the boat and the rc components. My "crew" wheighs around 220 scale-kg's, just as in real live:D I don't expect to have 1:1 sailing results like in a tank test, just want to see it sail and gain a few hints for design-spiral no. 5. Modelmaking is good to feel proportions and to check your design work if you can build what you have drawn.

Design:
In design my boat seems to look like the NIS Sharpies, but it isnt.

Compared to the NIS26 my design is much lighter ((2500kg vs 1600kg incl. trailer) and much cheaper to build. My bill of materials calls for 31 sheets of ply (roughly estimated), while the NIS 26 wants to have 63. (according to the NIS website, I dont know where they hide all that plywood.) NIS will become even more expensive, as carbon fibre masts will be standart on those boats in a few years. My shorter wooden mainmast (and the cheap OK Dinghy rig as a mizzen) is working together with a spuaretop mainsail (mimicry gaff) and should be a lot cheaper and nearly as effective.

The minimum depth with that short keel will be just under 2'. I'am experienced in flat water sailing (I sailed Jollenkreuzer for a long time) and in real live 1'10'' is just a small drawback against 10''. You can't beach your boat for long as the small waves and the sand will ruin your bottom, so you have to anchor in deeper water for the night anyway. You can not sail a centerboarder with the board all up, because you need the leeway prevention of at least a part of the centerboard. Kneedeep or ankledeep water, there is no big difference, you can walk ashore.

The advantages are massive: The boat can be much lighter due to the leverarm of the deeper keel. I'dont know how much ballast a NIS 26 needs, but I will have just 350 to 400 kg to have calculated positive stability for 120° without all the tricks (waterthight masts and reserve volume of the raised deck cabin). In the moment it is not decided what kind of board is housed in the keel, but the centerboard case will reach in no way more than 8'' into the cabin. Comfortable seating even for tall guys. (Look at the people on the website sitting in the NIS boats).

So thats it for today, see you soon, Michel

BATAAN

02-08-2011, 01:48 PM

Hello RWatson

All the effort:

No big deal, designing boats is my wintertime leisure activity (hobby). Until nowt is not planned that the my design will be built as a "real boat"

Model:

Yes, you are right, my model is 1/10th scale. For us "Metrics" its the logical choice, because we are thinking 1/10ths, sail areas shrink a 1/100th and wheight a 1/1000th. Very easy to calculate.

I have no problems with the wheight of the boat and the rc components. My "crew" wheighs around 220 kg, just as in real live:D

Design:

In design my boat seems to look like the NIS Sharpies, but it isnt.

Compared to the NIS26 my design is much lighter ((2500kg vs 1600kg incl. trailer) and much cheaper to build. My bill of materials calls for 30 sheets of ply (roughly estimated), while the NIS 26 wants to have 63. (according to the NIS website, I dont know where they hide all that plywood.) NIS will become even more expensive, as carbon fibre masts will be standart on those boats in a few years. My shorter wooden mainmast (and the cheap OK Dinghy rig as a mizzen) is working together with a spuaretop mainsail and should be a lot cheaper and nearly as effective.

My minimum depth with that short keel will be just under 2'. I'am experienced in flat water sailing and 1'10'' is just a small drawback against 10''. You can't beach your boat for long as the small waves and the sand will ruin your bottom, so you have to go into deeper water for the night anyway. You can't sail a NIS with the board all up, because you need the leeway prevention of at least a part of the centerboard. Kneedeep or ankledeep water, there is no big difference, you can walk ashore.

The advantages are massive: The boat can be much lighter due to the leverarm of the deeper keel. I'dont know how much ballast a NIS 26 needs, but I will have just 350 to 400 kg to have calculated positive stability for 120° without all the tricks (waterthight masts and reserve volume of the raised deck cabin). In the moment it is not decided what kind of board is housed in the keel, but the centerboard case will reach in no way more than 4'' into the cabin. Comfortable seating even for tall guys. (Look at the people on the website sitting in the NIS boats).

So thats it for today, see you soon, Michel
Seems you know what is needed for the planned conditions and use so your ideas should work for you. One problem with scaling in 1/10ths is that volume scales by the cube, thus Weston Farmer's long-used scale of 3/4" = 1' or one-sixteenth scale. This was for flotational use in appraising proposed designs, as it was very easy to scale up to actual.
Radio control use is an entirely different thing and quarter scale would work well for this little boat.
Sometimes I get to make cool models for other people and from my years at ILM doing ship models for pirate movies, one-quarter scale is best for believable effects that don't look like models, and one-sixth works if you push your techniques. This is because you can't make water drops smaller.
If I left the tank structure in the foreground off of this pic how many would think it a real brig, just coming to anchor with her sails aback in a hazardous situation?

Perm Stress

02-08-2011, 03:24 PM

220g for RC gear sound a little light. My 3-channel set ended up at 630g + frame, transmission mechanics and all.
___________________________

One often overlooked point to consider :) :
PAINT
-areas to be painted scale only M^2, and thickness (=weight) of painting is unlikely to be 10 times less; 3, may be 4 times, but not 10.
So in a small model weight of paint became quite a part of equation. One my 0.75m model hull, nearly DOUBLED her weight when painted :(.
Same is true for almost everything not left bare.

Perm Stress

02-08-2011, 03:27 PM

....
If I left the tank structure in the foreground off of this pic how many would think it a real brig, just coming to anchor with her sails aback in a hazardous situation?

I would be fooled, for a long time.
In movie one can search for suspiciously static people, in photo there is no such obvious clue...

rwatson

02-08-2011, 03:34 PM

220g for RC gear sound a little light....... .

Yes, my point exactly

Been through it all before at

http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/boat-design/scale-model-power-calcs-26955.html

Also, how do you get a boat the same size as a NIS being so much lighter ?
have you had an engineer do the calcs ?

But since its all a 'fun exercise', its all moot anyway. I am in my 5th year getting a similar boat designed, certificed, and ready to build, so I have a little idea of what is involved.

luckystrike

02-08-2011, 06:00 PM

220g for RC gear sound a little light. My 3-channel set ended up at 630g + frame, transmission mechanics and all.

PAINT
-areas to be painted scale only M^2, and thickness (=weight) of painting is unlikely to be 10 times less; 3, may be 4 times, but not 10.
So in a small model weight of paint became quite a part of equation. One my 0.75m model hull, nearly DOUBLED her weight when painted :(.

Ok, see the picture below. The sailing winch is missing, because i just bought it and it's on the postaltrip now. But it will weigh in at 55gr. Did I forgot something? I don't know because this is my first rc experience.

I don't try to scale down everything up to the paint. The hull is covered with epoxy now and will get just on layer of transparent spray paint. If the Model is at 1,35kg ready to sail I will be satisfied, because this is the designed displacement. And I'am optimistic, at the current stage the hull weighs 364gr. Add 350gr ballast and 220gr for the rc, I have more than 400gr left for deck, rc fastening and rig.

I'am not building a exact tank test model, I just want to see the boat sail and want to know if i could build it ... and if my lines are harmonic.

Grreetings from the North Sea Coast, Michel

luckystrike

02-08-2011, 07:12 PM

Also, how do you get a boat the same size as a NIS being so much lighter ?
have you had an engineer do the calcs ?

But since its all a 'fun exercise', its all moot anyway. I am in my 5th year getting a similar boat designed, certificed, and ready to build, so I have a little idea of what is involved.

Dear Ray,

No, I did the calcs by myself. But if the real boat will ever be built, a pro-designer will check the plan, thats for sure. I'am not that stupid.:P:D

I can just guess why my design is so light in comparison to the NIS 26, because I have not designed my boat with the specification of the NIS 26 beside me, I followed my own way of thinking "sharpie".

One reason why my design is so much lighter might be the amount of ballast. Perhaps somebody here on the forum knows how much ballast a NIS 26 carries and whats her bare weight and displacement.

Next is the trailer. I estimated 250kg for it, don't know how much for the NIS Trailer.

Lower freebord and beam and just sitting headroom save some m² of surface for sure. My interior is designed around double longitudual backbones, these are also the bunkfaces (bunkrisers? sorry, dont know the correct word in english). This is pure raceboat structure on low tech level and save a lot of kg's. Most of the interiorparts built in will have structural importance and if not, they are made from 1/4'' or even thinner ply. I have no bookshelfs, backrests and equally expendable fairings you can see on the interior fotos at the NIS website.

As stated before I expect to need 31 sheets of of ply and even if you allow 5 sheets more because i have overseen some parts or calculated wrong, the NIS 26 calls for nearly the double amount of ply. All that plywood has to go somewhere in the boat. I would guess it goes into structure and accomodation seperatly and not as one part for both.

"Every part that is not built into the boat, has not to be built, does not weigh anything and costs nothing" Dick Newick (free re-translated)

My calclations are realistic, my old Waarschip quartertoner was quite similar in length, beam, scantlings and interior, weighted around 1100kg ready to sail and had 550kg of lead.

Grreetings from the North Sea Coast, Michel

Angélique

02-08-2011, 07:31 PM

Ok, see the picture below. ....

Hé Lucky...

Looks like you forgot the attachment :idea:

Cheers,
Angel

Angélique

02-08-2011, 07:36 PM

Perhaps somebody here on the forum knows how much ballast a NIS 26 carries and whats her bare weight and displacement.

Here's (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nisboats/message/644)an ad on the NIS forum for a 26' that says... ‘‘Displacement 1800kg - Keel/Ballast Swing centre board with 550 kg internal ballast’’

Cheers,
Angel

luckystrike

02-08-2011, 07:38 PM

Looks like you forgot the attachment :idea:
Angel
fixed it!

BATAAN

02-08-2011, 09:33 PM

I would be fooled, for a long time.
In movie one can search for suspiciously static people, in photo there is no such obvious clue...
People were put on model with digital effects.

rwatson

02-09-2011, 05:32 AM

Dear Ray,

No, I did the calcs by myself. But if the real boat will ever be built, a pro-designer will check the plan, thats for sure. I'am not that stupid.:P:D

I can just guess why my design is so light in comparison to the NIS 26, because I have not designed my boat with the specification of the NIS 26 beside me, I followed my own way of thinking "sharpie".

One reason why my design is so much lighter might be the amount of ballast. Perhaps somebody here on the forum knows how much ballast a NIS 26 carries and whats her bare weight and displacement.

Next is the trailer. I estimated 250kg for it, don't know how much for the NIS Trailer.

.......

As stated before I expect to need 31 sheets of of ply and even if you allow 5 sheets more because i have overseen some parts or calculated wrong, the NIS 26 calls for nearly the double amount of ply. All that plywood has to go somewhere in the boat. I would guess it goes into structure and accomodation seperatly and not as one part for both.
.......

Grreetings from the North Sea Coast, Michel

Here's a few ideas of where the plywood in an NIS goes - how thick is your transom with a 40hp motor ? Have you allowed 4 sheets of 13 mm ply.

When you get around to insignificant detail like stability curves on a boat of that size, you will need around 500 kilos just like the NIS and the MacGregor 26 ( which is another 26ft sharpie) .

Your trailer will probably end up with a kerb weight of over 700 kilos, ( eg http://www.dunbier.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=80 )

because of all the ballast - unless you go for water ballast.

Its a bit simplistic to gloat how much better and lighter your unengineered, non-professional design is when its all just a twinkle in your minds eye.

frank smith

02-09-2011, 07:46 AM

Does the chine draft the shoal keel at all ?

luckystrike

02-09-2011, 09:50 AM

Here's a few ideas of where the plywood in an NIS goes - how thick is your transom with a 40hp motor ? Have you allowed 4 sheets of 13 mm ply.

When you get around to insignificant detail like stability curves on a boat of that size, you will need around 500 kilos just like the NIS and the MacGregor 26 ( which is another 26ft sharpie) .

Your trailer will probably end up with a kerb weight of over 700 kilos, ( eg http://www.dunbier.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=80 )

because of all the ballast - unless you go for water ballast.

Its a bit simplistic to gloat how much better and lighter your unengineered, non-professional design is when its all just a twinkle in your minds eye.

Hello Ray,

40HP???? Did I made a mistake?
where did I write that I want to have a 40hp motor on my 26footer???:confused::confused: My preferred propulsion is the new, strong Torqueedo with with a few Batteries placed under the cockpit. Their weight is only with 50kg included into the stability calculations, but helps for sailing stability just as normal inside ballst does. This is the reason why my ballastweights of the keel varies between 350 and 400kg. Please remember that my design process is not finished yet and Data may change when my design goes forward.

Trailerweight
check out the M1700 on this website http://www.ohlmeier-anhaenger.de/liste_motorb.htm, ok, I estimated wrong for 100kg, but this one shown is made from steel, not aluminium. In no way I need 700 kg for the trailer.

It would be very kind if you read my posts a little bit more careful, that would help to keep this thread more productive and would avoid discussions around misunderstandings.

insignificant detail like stability curve
Sorry, but in my eyes a stability curve is in no way a "insignificant detail" in a design process. For me its the question if the boat is sailing after a squall or if it is capsised. I capsized once with a Jollenkreuzer due to bad luck and it was no good experience. It was bad bad bad, very expensive and the sailing season was over.

My 350 to 400kg are around 8'' deeper than the 500kg of a "normal" sharpie, this is a significant difference in leverarm. Not counting the heavy equipment stowed near the bottom of the boat.

Twinkle in my minds...
It was definetly my fault to annotate the comparison between the NIS 26 and my design. They are totally different boats in the question of style and in amount of surfaces. My light camp-cruiser oriented interior should not be compared to the more comfortable one of the NIS. Sorry for that.

You asked where the difference in wheights come from and I tried to explain the differences in concept. In no word I said that my engenering is better than Kirby's or I laugh (gloat) at him just because my structure and interior it more simple and therefore lighter in weight. I would never do somethimg like this.

Yes you are right, I have no boat on the water to prove what I designed. But this is the reason why we are here on the forum, to learn from other peoples opinions.

But, just because I'am no professional designer my work is a twinkle in my minds eye? Sorry, not in my world. If I do something, I do it as careful as I can. I'am willing to learn if my knowledge is not sufficient. You can see it that I make stability curves for my design, just to have calculations instead of estimations.

Perhaps you should check if you have realistic feeling of the aspects of boats.
Until now your estimations were more incorrect than mine ...rc-equipment weight, trailer weight, 40 hp on a 26' sailingboat.
I think you have a negative tenor when you make comments on threads and you underline them with incorrect evidences, not seeking optimistic for objective solutions.

Take a look at the posts from Angelique or PAR ... they are constructive and objectiv.

Grreeting from the North Sea Coast, Michel

luckystrike

02-09-2011, 10:00 AM

Does the chine draft the shoal keel at all ?

Sorry, I don' understand what you mean. Can you say it in other words please?

Michel

Perm Stress

02-09-2011, 04:19 PM

Ok, see the picture below. The sailing winch is missing, because i just bought it and it's on the postaltrip now. But it will weigh in at 55gr. Did I forgot something? I don't know because this is my first rc experience.

I don't try to scale down everything up to the paint. The hull is covered with epoxy now and will get just on layer of transparent spray paint. If the Model is at 1,35kg ready to sail I will be satisfied, because this is the designed displacement. And I'am optimistic, at the current stage the hull weighs 364gr. Add 350gr ballast and 220gr for the rc, I have more than 400gr left for deck, rc fastening and rig.

I'am not building a exact tank test model, I just want to see the boat sail and want to know if i could build it ... and if my lines are harmonic.

Grreetings from the North Sea Coast, Michel

Looks like you use not so bomb-proof servos as I do; it is OK for a model so small. Mine are much sturdier, and power pack bigger.
Paint has to here anyway... . for 1/10 scale its weight could change from x% of total to 1x % of total.
Weights on model less than ~1m are always tricky, I wish you best luck.

rwatson

02-09-2011, 04:41 PM

Hello Ray,

40HP???? Did I made a mistake?
where did I write that I want to have a 40hp motor on my 26footer???:confused::confused: My preferred propulsion is the new, strong Torqueedo ...

Whoops - you are right, there were references to the "Chesapeake Marine Design Sharpie 36 " mixed in with the thread with a motor, you are right, it does take carefull reading.

Trailerweight
check out the M1700 on this website http://www.ohlmeier-anhaenger.de/liste_motorb.htm, ok, I estimated wrong for 100kg, but this one shown is made from steel, not aluminium. In no way I need 700 kg for the trailer.

Sorry, that site was the wrong language for me. I know that 250kg is way too optimistic for a boat of that size and that weight based on personal experience with trailers though.

insignificant detail like stability curve
Sorry, but in my eyes a stability curve is in no way a "insignificant detail" in a design process........ My 350 to 400kg are around 8'' deeper than the 500kg of a "normal" sharpie, this is a significant difference in leverarm. Not counting the heavy equipment stowed near the bottom of the boat.

I am glad you picked up that point. I was being a bit tongue in cheek with that 'insignificant detail'. Its one of the first things I would have checked in the initial design before goiing ahead very far.

Twinkle in my minds...
It was definetly my fault to annotate the comparison between the NIS 26 and my design. They are totally different boats in the question of style and in amount of surfaces. My light camp-cruiser oriented interior should not be compared to the more comfortable one of the NIS. Sorry for that.

You asked where the difference in wheights come from and I tried to explain the differences in concept. In no word I said that my engenering is better than Kirby's or I laugh (gloat) at him just because my structure and interior it more simple and therefore lighter in weight. I would never do somethimg like this.

Yes, the point I was hoping to make, is that designing boats gets much more complicated the closer they get to actually being built and/or launched. I would hate for you to go to all that effort, and hit a major 'show stopper'

I think you have a negative tenor when you make comments on threads and you underline them with incorrect evidences, not seeking optimistic for objective solutions.

Take a look at the posts from Angelique or PAR ... they are constructive and objectiv.

Yes, I definitely am looking at the 'down sides', but its not meant to be 'bad attitude', just to attempt to avoid unseen obstacles.

As you say, its all a fun learning experience - I do hope you are still having fun with it, and maybe it will end up as a working project

luckystrike

06-27-2011, 05:26 AM

As you say, its all a fun learning experience - I do hope you are still having fun with it, and maybe it will end up as a working project

Well its quite a long time since the last post, but I have made some progress and I definetly have a lot of fun with it.

Here are the latest photos of the model making stage ... the hull is finished and sheeted with epoxy, rc equipment is installed and tested. just some small parts to build and then the rig will follow.

If you want to see the building stages have a look at:

http://www.boote-forum.de/showthread.php?t=118247

Greetings from the North Sea Coast, Michel

58369 58370

58371 58372

58373 58374

Wavewacker

08-27-2011, 05:11 PM

luckystrike

09-05-2011, 02:07 AM

Hello to Everybody!

This is the latest stage of the modelmaking and just a few weeks to launching. Thanks to the bad summer the progress was better than I thought.

Now the boat has its keel, rudder and rigging. In the moment Iam buisy with sailmaking.

60907 60908 60909

luckystrike

09-20-2011, 07:49 AM

Hi, Folks,

as the last survivor of this thread I have the joy to say that my sharpie is sailing. Project Finished!

She came out of the kitchen-boatyard with 1.4 kg (0.2kg tolerance for additional ballast to improve sail carrying ability), passed the 100° capsize test and is sailing well for a 1:10 modell only 80cm long. All (very light) RC-components are strong enough to work reliable.

So, thats it, here are the sailing photos.

61520 61521

61522 61523

61524 61525

61526 61527

Angélique

09-20-2011, 08:05 AM

michael pierzga

09-20-2011, 08:37 AM

luckystrike

09-20-2011, 04:36 PM

Looks great. The sailplan is very attractive. One suggestion for asthetics would be to lower the cabin sides and increase the camber of the cabin roof. On a small boat you only need living space headroom near the centerline.

Hi Michael,

thanks for your compliments. I like the rig too, but I think I have missed the outline of the OK-Dinghy Sail for the mizzen a little, but the measures are correct. For the modell I decided not to use the square top rig, as it would be hard to trim without constant vang (?) or traveller adjustments.

Michael, first I have to say that Iam very satisfied with the asthetics. If you take a look at the drawings (posts about my sharpie in this thread starts on page 32 with post #467) you will see that the ratio between freeboard of the hull and hight of cabin sides is well balanced. The real height of the cabin sides is only 35cm (1' 2''), allowing sitting 4' headroom at the sides, where you will sit. Thats not much for a 26 footer. A real boat will have windows at the cabin sides. If you make them elypsoid, they will lower the appearence of the cabin.

In the end it is the form that follows it's funcion.

Making the profile (or cabin sides) lower would mean that you will have not enough headroom over the bunks for comfortable sitting. At least here are two inches tolerance for asthetics ... will it make any difference in looks? If you think so, you could modify it during the build. :D
You can lower the forward part of the cabin sides to make the cabin look more dutch style. The height there will not be needed, because there is the forward double bunk.

More camber in the cabin roof is difficult also. The sidedecks are only 3 to 4 inches wide and act only as a optical break between hull and cabin sides, they are not functional for walking. Any traffic from cockpit to foredeck will go over the cabin roof. Its unsave if you have to balance over a very round one.

What occured during the modelmaking is that a real built boat would offer a more comfortable and practical interior if the cabin would be lengthened or shifted by 1' to 1' 6'' to the stern. This would shorten the "social-cockpit" a little, but expand the interior.

Michel

luckystrike

09-20-2011, 05:40 PM

Very nice job Michel..!!

Well done, congratulations on the progress and the results http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/images/icons/icon14.gif

Thanks for keeping us updated, please keep up :)

Good luck!
Angel

Thank you Angel!

This project is finished and Iam happy with the results. RC sailing is great fun and something to do for the winter time or when real sailing is no fun (at 1 Bft.)

Anyway, during the build I made some concept scetches for a 22 footer following the same style and concept as "No rEgret". It will use a Finn-Dinghy-and a OK-Dinghy Rig. And I have an idea about a more traditional 20' sharpie as a daysailer for two or a cruiser for one.

But I will not go into the design stage with them until someone really wants to have one.

What future design concerns ... you will have noticed in the "sailboats" section of boatdesign.net (seaworthy,bigger i-550 thread) that I made some designwork and renderings for a modern-sharpie-racer-cruiser. (Yes, I design with freeship now!).

May be ... when the winter is cold and long and you cannot work in the workshop.... I will open my box where the modelmaking stuff is stored....

Grrreetings from the North Sea Coast, Michel

BATAAN

09-20-2011, 06:54 PM

Bigger one.

luckystrike

09-21-2011, 05:13 PM

Bigger one.

Hello Bataan,

this is a very funny Idea. First I take the Egret and devellop its concept towards a new, safer, more useful and better sailing boat and then I go back and design another replika (number 4) of the original Egret? This makes definetly no sence in any direction of thinking. :confused:

Perhaps I should do it :P

No, of course not :D

Grrreeings from the North Sea Coast, Michel

BATAAN

09-21-2011, 05:32 PM

I didn't mean to irritate you, just published photos of a boat that arrived swiftly and hove to for the harbormaster, don't know anymore than it's a small sharpie based yacht. If you have experience with the design and have improved it and misinterpreted me, my mega-bad....

luckystrike

09-21-2011, 11:37 PM

You published them before on another thread! Its the "wooden boat" designed Egret. You can buy the plans in the woodenboatstore and build it if you like it so much. An yes you are right, its wonderfull looking boat.

I misinterpreted your post, but Iam not angry or somewhat. My reaction was meant funny, (see the emoticons).

Michel

FMS

09-22-2011, 01:23 AM

I appreciate seeing the photos of the new model and the old. Bigger doesn't mean better was implied. The photos are very well done and give a good context too.

troy2000

09-22-2011, 01:36 AM

Troy, how is your project going? Do we have a real sharpie yet?

This is an outstanding thread for newbs like myself. It has answered alot of my questions about the sharpies. When the thread got bogged down between some as all threads seem to, it got back to business and it's a loooong read, but worth it!

Thanks!

Nope, don't have a real sharpie.... and I may never have one. I got sidetracked when PAR offered me plans for a 28' riverboat. I know that's a radical switch of plans. But I'm a lot more likely to coax the wife onto what PAR's drawing, than I am to get her near something with sails and sitting headroom.

The original plan was to have the sharpie ready to go when I retire in 2015; now it'll be the riverboat instead. Meanwhile I'm getting ready to build Billy Atkin's 21' 'sailing canoe' Excelsior, so I'll still have something with sails to play in.

You can see what PAR's whipping up for me here:

http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/wooden-boat-building-restoration/head-turner-par-39763.html

troy2000

09-22-2011, 01:39 AM

Hi, Folks,

as the last survivor of this thread I have the joy to say that my sharpie is sailing. Project Finished!

She came out of the kitchen-boatyard with 1.4 kg (0.2kg tolerance for additional ballast to improve sail carrying ability), passed the 100° capsize test and is sailing well for a 1:10 modell only 80cm long. All (very light) RC-components are strong enough to work reliable.

Congratulations on getting the model into the water; looks great. I should go ahead and finish my sharpie model, even if it's no longer a study project for a full-sized one.

PAR

09-22-2011, 01:49 AM

Which Egret are you all talking about? I can think of a half a dozen Egret sharpies (supposedly). The Brewer Egret is 44', then there's Parker's, Bill Garden's, of course the Munroe Egret, etc., etc., etc.

The recent Egret that appeared in WoodenBoat magazine wasn't very close to a sharpie, though it started out this way. It was heavily modified in order to meet EU and owner requirements which affected the B/L ratio, freeboard and a host of other "issues" that their (the EU) blanket approach to yacht design dictates. A real, typically proportioned sharpie couldn't be offered in the EU as it's considered unsafe in many categories.

luckystrike

09-22-2011, 06:38 AM

Congratulations on getting the model into the water; looks great. I should go ahead and finish my sharpie model, even if it's no longer a study project for a full-sized one.

I think you should do it if you have some time left beside your "Excelsior" project. RC-Sailing is great fun, never thought it could be that much.

All my RC components are very cheap second hand from ebay. You only need two functions (rudder and winch) and thats it. Quite simple. Mine were less than 60 Euros.

luckystrike

09-22-2011, 07:44 AM

Which Egret are you all talking about? I can think of a half a dozen Egret sharpies (supposedly).

The recent Egret that appeared in WoodenBoat magazine wasn't very close to a sharpie, though it started out this way. It was heavily modified ... .

Dear PAR,

Bataan posted some photos ( the gaff rigged one above) of the 28' Egret replika, offered as a plan at the Woodenboatstore.

The model sailing is my design "No rEgret", one of the three sharpie designs besides "Troy's" inland sharpie and the one of "daves g". My design is a modern devellopment, based on Egret.

I think thats all.

PAR. which sharpie do you mean?

Michel

Wavewacker

09-24-2011, 07:04 AM

Troy, (and PAR) that's a real beauty! The problem with that one is that it's not built and not in my yard! Takes tons of build pics. Get started, you're on the clock. I'll see how difficult it is and then give PAR his due....

But I really wanted a much smaller outboard, up to a 25hp.

I will need that crane, but with an electric 12V winch running through it, in pipe and a large base plate, those kegs are heavy!

Angélique

09-24-2011, 08:15 AM

Troy, (and PAR) that's a real beauty! The problem with that one is that it's not built and not in my yard!

But I really wanted a much smaller outboard, up to a 25hp.

See right bottom corner (http://www.boatdesign.net/gallery/data/500/RYD-25_3sc.jpg) ;)

Good luck with the build Troy..!!

Cheers,
Angel

PS - didn't mean to hijack this thread, see Troy's link (http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/boat-design/30-plywood-sharpie-30029-37.html#post488345) for the thread about this boat..

uncajohn

11-24-2011, 02:36 AM

Hello all!
I am building a North Carolina sharpie model too! (based upon information from the Parker's book). This will be a working model, in some parts accurate, scalewise & in some builded like a toy (just a few nessesary frames inside the plywood hull).
I am posting some images...

John

troy2000

11-24-2011, 09:08 AM

It's looking very good so far. I hope you'll keep posting pic's of your progress; I'd love to see it in the water.

uncajohn

11-24-2011, 02:17 PM

Sure,
but i am working on this as a.. brake between illustrating projects, so it will take some time.
Although, i've got the radiocontrol & the sailwinch already!

By the way, the boat is 99cm long (1:10 scale).

John

Wavewacker

11-24-2011, 04:10 PM

See right bottom corner (http://www.boatdesign.net/gallery/data/500/RYD-25_3sc.jpg) ;)

Good luck with the build Troy..!!

Cheers,
Angel

PS - didn't mean to hijack this thread, see Troy's link (http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/boat-design/30-plywood-sharpie-30029-37.html#post488345) for the thread about this boat..

Well! Hey hey hey, that works, 10 to 30 hp! Very nice and a rather difficult build. But, hey, it sure meets the goals. Thanks!

PAR

11-24-2011, 11:34 PM

Nothing particularly difficult to make on Egress, Wavewacker. The hull is the simplest form to build, fully developed and very little twist. Even the bow, which can be a pain in the butt on vertical steams hasn't much twist in it. The deck structures are straight forward, plywood over light studs in the structural areas, with a foam core. The roofs are the same, with less structural reinforcement (a true cored roof). Plywood bulkheads and furniture accommodations, with the simplest of propulsion arrangements. I'll admit it's not a small project for most people, but Troy's no stranger to projects of this scope, admittedly different then what he's use to, more then within is skill set. I think the hardest part of this build will be, learning how to sew a straight row of stitches in the cushions on the settees.