Affordable seaworthy cruiser

How did you decide that 14' below that water line was correct for what you wanted to accomplish? I sometimes start with general idea derived from
a compilation of data on many similar types. But this is just the start and
does not make a complete design. I know It is tough going but , you can always buy a design. I like to mess with design because i think it is fun, but I do not enjoy some of it. Still it is good for the mind.

Go to the software section of this forum and find info on "Free Ships" .
It wont design a boat for you , but you can collect data with it , and make nice renderings. But what you do with the data is up to you.

 

Greetings,

Pierre,
If your boat what would you change in the SOR to accomodate the design?

 

Apex,

The costs is the major factor with any boat and it seems to be a stickler in this case it will go up to more than $12,000.00, but as this is a concept at this time it is not known by how much. Remember this is not for a client so what ever that figure is, decisions will be made then when known.

Second, the previous questions asked where to get some understanding of what is possible, even if they dont conform to your BOR and way of building, they are important. The design spiral is based on NA's getting a clear understanding and confirmation from the owners and later getting paid.
This is not the case here. Questions were asked about certain building techniques, sailplans, engines, etc. You can think all you want about the design not working, that doesnt matter, the questions asked are pertinent and can be answered so that optimization will be more efficient.

Study is what is happening here, this way good qualities can be brought into the design. The porportions will stay, ballast and sailplans will be added accordingly. If you can work within those parameters, fine, if not thats understandable and I accept your refusal to help.

 

Frank Smith,

While back, a calculation was made of similar boat design of mine, measurement was made at each foot of displacement, added and overall all Cp. was determined at around 70% at WL.

That was time consuming and dont really want to do more calculating if theres an easier way. Hard to find extra time but when possible will do a thorough research on computer programs.

 

Dennis RB,

The scriptures just talk of three dimensions: height, lenght, depth. There is no other references to shape. This shape has been scaled before, the international 110 and 210 are exact as well as some of the scandavian racers from the 30's, forgot what there called.

 

In all seriousness, you assume YOU can tell the professionals when the water boils?

There is no HELP to achieve your idiotic dream! Get it, the vessel you dream about (and never be able to handle) is ten times the budget, and about half the displacement you are drivelling here.

But of course, there will be some similar weird minded to "calculate" you sh!itty dream further.

Go, die,

The world has brought the fantastic system called "evolution" into power to sort crap like you out.

Do not try to tell other novices it could be done!

Richard

 

Apex,

Evolution is a lie, but your still allowed to hang from tree branches by your tail.

Jubilee will work and please quit hijacking this tread.

Peace.

 

Quote: "Evolution is a lie, but your still allowed to hang from tree branches by your tail."

And Goody, you're still illiterate.

If you believe so strongly in the power of your three numbers (length, width, depth) to create a boat, why don't you hire a naval architect, and have them build a boat to your specs.

If a NA will actually take you on as a client, all of these issues become his or her problem. It might be possible to design a vessel to your specs, although certainly not to your costs, but only a NA can tell you that for sure.

 

Thats why I am alive, and successful, and YOU are a dead attempt!

 

Hi, I suggest that all readers of this thread look at page 223 of Hasler and McCleod's book "Practical Junk Rig". The boat shown, "Sumner",has similar proportions and shape to Jubilee and was a succesfully cruised boat, making several long cruises. The bilge keels are an idea that could merit some study as they may provide better windward ability with the desired shallow draft. I dont think that Blondie Hasler was either stupid or irresponsible and this design proved successful.

 

Nice,

and scaled to 60ft it still works?

Read all the related **** this guy has published, before you dare to say a word.

Regards
Richard

 

Apex, calm down guy, your going to blow a gasket and these guys sill won't understand.

Goodwill, why don't you buy a working boat with your $12,000. I will find a you boat somewhere for $12k that you can run somewhere with. It is cheaper to buy a used boat than to build one. If you can't find the boat you want for $12,000 then you can't build it for less.
http://boats.oodle.com/view/1987-26-foot-regal-io-265/2088136484-rocky-river-oh/

 

Sorry, what is your success ? just wondering , don't get red and blow up, I don't want to be responsible for your death.....

 

Apex,
I did read the whole 19 pages before I posted my comment. You may be an experienced designer but you shure as hell are not very helpful to an amateur asking for help. I agree that he is off the mark in many respects but then so are many professional designers, hence the Fastnet disaster!!
Those who think outside the box are frequently vilified by the mainstream, but that does not necessarily make them wrong, any more than it makes the mainstream right.
Before you ask what are my qualifications, I have been sailing since I was a child on everything from old gaff cutters to high tech racing boats, from dinghy's to 80 footers. I am an amateur boat designer and have built most of my designs including one that I sailed from California to New Zealand, as well as over 20,000 ocean miles. I have sailed on Thames barges as well as other flat bottom and hard chine boats and have weathered storms of force 12. So I do speak from as base of some experience. Your attitude that everyone is wrong except you is just as bad as Goodwill but in the opposite extreme in saying that the establishment is always right. There is room for all opininons and lines of thought as long as everyone is openminded enough to accept that peoples opinions, needs, views etc are different, respect them for that and reply in a constructive manner.
I belive that Goodwills base for his design is flawed, but in the spirit of the design he is attempting offer the following comments.
1) I believe that a beam of at least 10 feet would provide a boat with more stability and structural integrity. Also some flare to the topsides would reduce the waterline beam and would lead to a natural rocker to the keel and curve to the sheerline.
2) If wanting to go offshore I believe that a keel or keels are essential and that the draft should increase to around four feet to accommodate the keels(s). My personal preference for this type of design is bilge keels that flare outwards from the centerline at the base in a manner similar to a Scheel keel. When heeled this provides a keel depth approaching six feet and provides good lateral resistance.
3) Goodwills obsession with using secondhand bermudan sails for this type of vessel is misplaced. A second hand bermudan sail can easil be recut to make a gaff or junk sail and this would be much better for the proposed design. Using gaff or junk rig would give a much shorter mast height more suited to the hull type and proposed ballast ratio. Solid masts may be ok but are only suitable for heavy boats because of their weight and I would not suggest them for this design.
4) The proposed construction is not thought out. With a ballast keel(s) strong floors will be needed to take the weight and stress of the keels and bolts will definitely be needed to hold them.
Also the design that I posted earlier is 46 feet long, onl four feet less than Goodwills proposed boat.

 

Do I detect a note of exasperation in your voice Richard?
Anyone who can honestly make a remark like 'evolution is a lie' is beyond help... I gave up way back on page 1....