piss-poor boat plans!......

Um, how come nobody has mentioned that this boat looks like whoever designed it doesn't know anything about yacht design, and that the boat will almost certainly suck? Lucky fellow, you really don't want to build this boat, anyway! Next time, find out more about the designer before parting with your cash! He should know the difference between the p.c. and p.r.

 

So decrepit yottie what are you burbling about? If you wish to resurect old forums that others have finished with long ago, at least read them and make your comments relative! Looks like we got us another smarty who wants to make a name for himself! Yank too! sorry people despite my vow to leave you people alone (especially now that BillyDoc made me an honoury "Yank") this one looks ripe for some picking! (he he! don't you just love it)

 

Christ just loft the thing and be done with it.

 

Sorry about the delay in posting but I just joined up. Despite your fearless and wrathful style I was interested in your (and other's) comments. There are indeed some scatalogical plans out there. I am watching a good friend slowly going mad trying to decipher a poorly drawn and printed set of "plans", and the finished item is unlikely to reflect the designer's intent too accurately.

Your list of things to include in a set of plans is a good one and clearly based on experience, and your notes on line drawings reads like an extract from a drafting manual. For plans intended for beginners I would add a glossary of nautical terms to the list you provide.

However, the conventions for boat and ship plans are different from industrial design, and each designer has a unique style. While standardisation would be nice boatbuilding has been around for a long time. Despite a lifetime of designing start-of-art stuff in my own highly technical (non-nautical) field it took me some time to get used to interpreting plans for static fluid-supported lightweight curvilinear structures; er ... boats.

You haven't shown the plans to another member for an opinion so I don't know if your complaints are justified or if your expectations were excessive. We are not talking about industrial manufacturing with outsourced parts and assembly-line construction. Assuming the plans are at least legible (my friend's plans weren't), what you get in a plan set will be determined by the boat's construction. For example in a stitch and glue boat the paramount need would be for accurate tables or good quality well-dimensioned drawings for the parts which define the shape and construction of the boat with detailed instruction to put them together, and a bill of materials is a must. Since wood is a variable material and few amateurs possess the machinery to make parts fit first time, a lot of smaller parts will be cut to fit. Personally, I find that part of the challenge.

Many designers prefer to limit build options and avoid sail plans for good reason, liability for safety problems being one. Each designer has an individual philosophy. I have not published any plans yet, but I have been working on a non-stitch and glue approach that generates the hull shape simply without the need for elaborate forms, drawings or lofting. I have got the construction method sorted out but I have a lot to learn about boat design and will not publish until I can design a boat that performs as intended. When (and if) I do I will make it clear to potential builders just what I will provide and how I expect them to proceed. Then anyone who gets upset that my plans omit stuff they consider essential will only have themselves to blame.

You got some bad press and accusations of being cheap, but I wouldn't call $125 for a set of plans cheap. Depends on the boat of course; if you are building a trans-atlantic racer as a first boat ... Did/could/would you ask for help on plan interpretation? Many designers are happy to provide advice and budget some time in their price; and have websites with FAQs. What did the seller claim when you bought the plans? If the approach is of the simple-to-build, non-lofting persuasion then you can hardly expect detailed lines and a complex drawing set.

Finally, my unfortunate friend might have been wiser to send his plans back before he started building. Did you have that option?

 

$125.00 for a set of plans with full size patterns would indeed be cheap. A designer that won't include sail plans because of "liability issues" is a fraud. That is part of the job. Also, expecting unlimited customer service and advice included in the $125.00 is naive. No one could stay in business at those prices. The list of materials is optional. A builder should be able to make one. If a person has no experience or knowledge of boatbuilding, the designer has no reponsibility to educate him. A designer only designs the boat, and for a price, consults and supervises.

 

Caldera Boats' delivery is a bit harsh. Perhaps he is referring to the legion of somewhat uninformed people who fancy themselves as boat designers. There are a lot of those out there as the more knowledgeable readers of these forums are well aware. I have some resentment about the imposters unaware that they are imposters. On the other hand one must not be too severe with those who dont know what they dont know.

The prudent thing to do is buy plans from established designers who have a satisfactory, or better, reputation. Some of the best of small boat designers try to evaluate the probable capabilities of the eventual builder. If they think the market is to back yard builders then they'll deliberately avoid too much detail. Give an inexperienced builder too much information and he'll become confused and discouraged. He wont build the boat and he'll damn the designer.

I too want a table of offsets but some pretty decent boats are built without offsets. There are a gob of stitch and glue types that describe sheet layout only. Some pretty good boats are made by both professional and amateur builders while using that method. Actually old time builders did it by eye, without benefit of plans of any kind. Some of them built damned good boats that way. Caldera may never have seen the old time magazines like "How to Build 20 Boats", Rudder magazine, Popular Mechanix magazine, etc. Those mags had plans that were sometimes pretty sparse but there were a tremendous number of boats built from them. Almost all those boats would actually float.

Caveat Emptor

 

I agree with what was being said. I want to start using stereo lithography for a couple of projects I am trying to start up. Is there a way to get the prototypes for a cheaper price? Does it always depend on the material required?

 

Plan ? we dont need no stinking plan.

 

not if you're building an affordable ocean cruiser

 

Small boat designers are financially so well rewarded that they should be able to get out fully documented plans in very small numbers with all the bells and whistles as well as offer follow up service to all buyers. Of course, the plans should also be very cheap or free

Different designs and different kinds of construction call for different kinds and amounts of information. In some kinds, like an S&G hard chine boat, providing a full table of offsets, including diagonals and buttock lines is not only superfluous but is certain to cause a lot of confusion and call backs when it is neither desirable nor necessary. Especially true for powerboats.

In other cases all that information is needed and should be provided. The amount of information should also be tailored to the intended builder, their skills, likely building conditions and materials and supplies they may have access to. What is proper for a commercial builder turning out multiple units is entirely different from that best suited to a home builder of average skills and knowledge.

The OP apparently has knowledge and skills such that he should be able to judge ahead of time which designers and plans are worth the asking price. If he received piss-poor plans, he bears at least part of the blame.

 

Howdy,

After some years of experience doing plans for builders - its not about particular technology - this misses the point by a long way.

For some targeted markets it is a about a quality based approach that assumes that the builder might know very little about boatbuilding.

For other markets there might be with very experienced builders, but if the designer is really aware of the processes they can make the builder's life much more pleasant (and profitable - this type of builder tends to link profitable and pleasant together!).

CAD methods (and specific methods above) have an advantage in that the dimensions can be very accurate - that is a definite advantage, but that's the limit of where the technology has an advantage. It doesn't really have much influence on quality.

As a designer you have to have a really clear idea of how to work out a procedure for the whole build to go smoothly - the real practical limitations of building methods.

If the designer hasn't done a lot of building, or at least not been exposed to building on a day to day basis (eg in the same workshop and the instant feedback that provides) there is little chance the plans will be much good at all.

This type of experience leads to a depth of quality in the plan, where as much as possible is resolved for the builder beforehand as possible.

If you have that approach and also have the experience the builder will give you a completely different sort of feedback that will help improve the plans further.

A second area is they way that mistakes are logged and rectified in the drawings or model. It is an obvious part of QC, but it gets missed out on very frequently. Things drawn in out of scale (with traditional methods), Pieces that don't quite fit or are hard to assemble with CAD.

The discipline of going back and fixing the drawings, even in a one-off shows that you are serious about improving plans at every stage. The act of drawing in the correction and the audit trail of drawing versions is critical for lifting the design standard.

If you show the builder you are aware of these types of problems they will help you improve your game as a designer - and they will also feel that they have gotten the value they expected from the plan.

A funny thing happens too - that if you acknowledge the mistake and show you are serious by amending drawings, customers (being mostly good guys) will support you.

One of the biggest problems (for all designers) is estimating time unless you have a lot of experience with a particular type of project. Clients don't take happily to waiting around for drawings or a file to turn up.

These types of aspects are far more critical to a boat plan being perceived as "good".

Knud Reimers once said that you need two things to be a boat designer.

"A sharp pencil and a clean white shirt".

This is still exactly right - it is about the tools in your head and how you relate to the client. Not that you need pencils or white shirts these days.

To think a particular technology will make plans "better" misses the point because it ignores that other factors are infinitely more important in the perception of "plan quality".

Best wishes
Michael Storer

 

I don't want to sound too lovey dovey with my designer, but Kurt Hughes got all this stuff right.

The only thing I didn't get from him was the correct version of a materials list done in Excel by someone. That's it.

He fixed that mistake within about 3 hours of my sending an email.

Other than that, his plans included everything you need.

 

I believe that one can't buy plans for 200$ and build boat other than tender.

I have seen 'design set' done by one famous designer, for 26' sailboat that included 3-4 sheets of drawings: general arrangement, sail plan and lines plan from 21' that one has to scale himself by multiplying all numbers in table of offsets by 1.152.

If one likes to pay that amount he can’t complain about quality of plans. It can be done if builder is experienced; it can not be built by someone without experience.

Probably this is reason why we almost never sell designs to amateur builders – we do not want headache to reply basic questions, and then listen complains that something is wrong.

 

To cater for amateur builders is a different mindset, thats all.

The quality issues have the same solutions. Correct stuff as errors and misinterpretations appear until (almost) everything is resolved.

Before I started designing I worked at a business that cut out kits and sold plans to amateur builders.

This was back in the late '80s.

We had quite a big range of plans from different designers and we differentiated ourselves from timberyards and resin suppliers by having most things available as well as building a reputation for support for the home boat builder.

The thing we found is that
1/ with some plans we ended up getting asked a million question
2/ other plans we could sell and would get one or two well directed questions if any at all.

It was a stark contrast.

Guess whose plans we preferred to sell!

The plans we found really good were strip plank plans from the "Canoecraft" book, Bolger stuff, Woodenboat stuff and the remarkable plans of Iain Oughtred.

All these made a successful specialty of supplying amateur builders with plans that reduced their questions to a reasonable number.

Best wishes
Michael Storer

 

I'm not sure why this long dead thread has been revived and good to see you post again Mik, but there are people that design boats that have never built or been involved with a build and there are those that design boats that have built and are usually actively involved, often as project coordinators. All engineers and architects suffer from this problem, what they think they know and what they really know.

The good ones aren't regurgitating from their lesson plans, but from practical experience and their studies.

Lastly, you shouldn't judge a set of plans without knowing who the plans were intended for. A set of plans for a familiar and experienced builder will be well short of many aspects, because both parties know what to expect from each other. This many result in 3 or 4 drawings and limited explanation, mostly because the details have been previously hashed out and need no further description. All designers that work with professionals have plans like this. Last week I shipped two sets of the same design. One went to a fairly skill back yard builder in Ohio and included 23 separate sheets of paper, drawings, instructions, etc., while the other had 10 sheets, because it was being sent to a guy (shop) I've known for years, who's built my stuff before and knows what to expect. He doesn't need the instructions for making fillets or the building and material handling tips I supplied with the other plan set, etc., etc., etc.

This is often the case with "stock plans" from dead designers. You order them and you get a tube with 4 A-1 sheets of drawings, no instructions, just a BOM, some scantlings and maybe a quick design description. The original set was done by a profession shop and the novice builder feels less then confidant about proceeding.

In some ways I agree with Alik, but only if the plans weren't produced with the back yard builder in mind. Many of my plans are fairly cheap and still include the few dozen sheets of drawings, instructions, tips and tricks, etc. Personally, I think a potential builder should pay to be nurse maided through the process, if this is what they want, but unfortunately you don't move too many plans sets this way. Maybe a two way approach, offering plans as professional grade or novice, with the pro plans being half price!