Affordable seaworthy cruiser

Greetings,

Peter & Battaan, thanks for the good observations. Coldmolding was the reason for the round bilges. All bulkhead frames would be plumb vertically and horizontally with the 18" radius typical throughout except for the final 5.5' at the ends. This was done to make it easier to wrap the strips around the hull.

The first & last strips would have been .75" running fore and aft, and two .25" in between running + - 45 degree for a total of about 2" hull thickness. 2x4's (1.5" x 3.5") edge cut would make the strips 1.5" wide.

Coldmolding would be more work but besides that, the points you make about the narrow boat loosing stability would be exacerbated with round bilges. That was one reason for the box shape in the first place. With the box shape filling out the sides and gaining stability there would be less need to fill out the ends as you mention.

 

Peter, in regard to other points.

Centerboard is maybe small for 53' length not so much for the 8'-10" beam. Another reason the small center board aft was added along with giving more lateral resistance it can be used to move CE aft according to hanging sails.
These are just preliminary ideas, thinking about the hazards daggerboards could pose was cause for drawing CB's.

Will try to figure out better placement of outboard. Is a longer boat less prone to pitching? Remember Dashew talking about "long lever arm" referencing long boats and the better, more stable ride they offer.

Chopping ends off: Eventhough they may seem vestigial, they play an intricate part to overall stability. Explaination for this is lacking, but do know its true.

Shoal draft is a result of hull shape & displacement needed. Prior mention was made of Bolger's thoughts on shallow draft boats and no reason was given to contradict his theory. The flat bottom boat might cleave to the water just as much as an Archer type sits in it, dont know but have not heard logical explanation to refute this.

 

hi

In the end you will do what you want to do.

Why you need the double end to be so fine, I am not sure, I guess you have your own idea.

I was reading Reuel Parker's book, 'the new cold moulded boats' today in the library. I came across a boat that is very similar to yours in overall concept.

Exuma 45

http://www.parker-marine.com/parker2_1.htm

this page only gives a side on view, but the other views it looked nice. It is shoal draught, a fraction more than your design, but is still low, worst comes to worse you can travel across a bar at high tide, then to get back, wait for the next high tide.

Note that max draught is aft. That allows the bow to be pointed to the beach, in shallow water, whilst the slope of the beach keeps the stern in slightly deeper water.

Overall it is very similar in concept to yours. Is 12ft x 45ft. You may consider that wide, but it is a narrow ratio for most boats.

I think i might leave u to it.... if you build your boat as it is approximately drawn i will eat my hat

 

here it is

http://www.parker-marine.com/exuma44planpage.htm

if u want it a fraction longer, then I guess you could add a few feet to the stern for your personal needs. It is very close in concept to what you have drawn, 2.5ft draugth from memory. Your craft may be a fraction shallower, but given tides, how many places are going to be accessable to your craft, vs this one.

 

Greetings,

Peter, did try to come up with better solution for engine location without sucesss. Your concerns of bouyancy lacking in ends are understandable and not taken lightly, need more time to work it out. Thanks for the Exuma 44 pic, do have the Ruell's books and not sure if its in there.

If going with rounded bilges, building bottom about 3' up as Ruell has shown would be an option, the the topsides can be added after once it turned over. Also the swing keel will be done away with, it does seem small and complex. Will do as the French do, if something is hit the DG is built to fall off and not jamb and then an onboard replacement is put in. This will work just will not carry additional DG.

 

for your amusement, I saw this yesterday

http://tara-tari.blogspot.com/p/le-voilier-tara-tari.html

2 french fellows sailed from Bangladesh to Europe. You notice the twin leeboard setup. Uses a pivoting rod going across the boat. As just one more more option for lateral resistance. For a boat your size the setup would have to be much stronger, probably quite heavy also. If you are having 2 cabins with no walkway, then then having this rod go through the middle of the boat may be an option. Otherwise the only way to get from the front of the boat to the back is over the rod.

What else

In the Exuma 44 (not 45) the outboards were placed either side of the skeg. I have used a single outboard off center. A single outboard 2ft from the centerline would still work fine for a boat of this size.

When you look at other double enders, the width is generally carried far towards the ends. Because your stern is so fine, taking a saw and removing the last 5 or 6ft would have minimal effect on drag.

The book is worth reading, it may be in your library in Cleveland, you do not have to buy it.

Is 8.11am here....monday morning.. better do some work...

 

I think for stability decrease chine radius to 6 inches or less, carry beam farther into the ends. One off-center "centerboard" is perfectly workable too, way over by the chine.
What was the reason for the pointy ends again? Rationale?

 

Why rounded chines?
I thought the whole (main) idea here was "easy to build"?
Why vertical sides and rounded bilges?

 

Greetings,

Having problems uploading. Reason for rounded bilges is construction using coldmolding, this would 1.) do away with concerns of impact at chines, 2.) wrap material completely around hull-make it stronger. 3.) less waste 4.) less turbulence.

Was trying to upload drawing of hull sheathing if going with chines. As mentioned previously, the idea is to:
1.) Use standard 2x4's x 16'-0".
2.) Coat with epoxy at least twice. (wet on wet)
3.) Frames would be bulkheads stations as shown on drawings.
4.) Secure 2x4's (edge up) to frames with screws and use epoxy adhesive between bulkhead frame and 2x4's running longitudinally.
5.) Apply bead of polyurethane at top edge. This would not be structural, it is only used for the purpose of allowing movement as 2x4 could be unstable, accidental water ingress or even epoxy coatings not isolating wood enough from moisture in air.
6.) Next longitudinal 2x4's are laid in same manner until hull is completed vertically.
7.) First and second layers of epoxied 1/4" plywood are secured over 2x4's with staples.
8.) Fabric over plywood.
9.) Overall thickness of appro two inches.

This being considered as one way of constructing boat. It basically would be a form of strip building using the frames for tranverse support as is typically done with coldmolding and strip planking, the 2x4's running fore and aft which would provide tremendous longitudinal strength (laid with butt joints). Next the two 1/4" ply would make it a composite tying it all together for lateral strength and watertightness.

What do you think? Can this work? Explain any problems you would foresee.

Bataan, the radius bilge was designed if using the coldmolding method, with an 18" radius there would be no problem molding the wood to fit-not so with a 6" radius.

Regarding pointy ends: With long length we can see again what Dashew describes as the "long lever arm", this would introduce stability longitudinally and guessing maybe upto 40 degrees each way, the rest is hoped to be gained through enough ballast and midship bouyancy. Without the strong shoulder (which is needed with spray type boats because of their wide sterns causing huge uplifting from behind) hope the narrow stern will keep the boat in the water and stop overturning. The sail plan has to be low as drawn. Emphasizing again, eventhough the boat looks pointy, sqaure shape gives maximum bouyancy for width, without flare most average boats have about this much bouyancy at ends. The only drawback without flare would be wet ride forward and even this might not be the case once Jubilant is actually built and sailing.

Peace.

 

Mixing two different building methods is more work and cost.
Why a flat bottom and vertical sides then?

Maybe this is more like you want?

 

Greetings,

What do you guys think of building bottom up? The bottom will be 3" thick built on frames, fabric added, then Coppercoat. Offcourse this will be with DG rather than full keel. The DG should be built like proa type that is hollow in middle and held up at to hook with just the sides, this way if something is hit it can snap off.

Secondly, thinking about raised deck at stern to allow OB to completely raise in the hull with plug at bottom to seal while sailing. If done this way the deck in rear would be raised appro. 12". One other advantage if deck is raised just aft of helm it would allow sitting area on each side of helm when weather is good. The raised deck would still be under 5.3' to stay within proper dimensions.

 

Great idea!

Leave it so when launching!

 

Apex,

Thanks for your contribution of opionions and thoughts, but your starting to get on my nerves.

 

Goody is earnest, polite and willing to learn. I hope the Atkin design so thoughtfully posted above will educate him, and all of us in the type.

 

Noy sure if anyone mentioned the Herreshoff Meadowlark when speaking about shoal draft cruisers. The leeboards and hull shape are friendly