Would that catamaran ever sail?

what is it? Because the only reason it is because it is easier.

Straight plywood sides, nail it together, put some foam inside just in case it doesnt get sealed right then epoxy the joints if there is some excessive gap in it. Instead of a curved hull where the panels are held together by the epoxy, in this case it would be more for filling the gaps and keeping the water out.

The reality is that I wont use a kayak like inuits did to hunt for food in the artic ocean everyday. Even if used every week, it would be only for short periods, same for a sailing boat.

If it goes at 5 knots and not at 15 knots, do I care? It is slow in both cases. If it sails from Island 1 to Island 2 in 5 hours and not in 3 hours. It is fine for me, it is fine for most people. Sailing is slow.

 

It isn't easier. It's harder. On top of that it isn't structurally sound; nails going into the edge grain of plywood will split the plies, instead of holding.

And you still haven't answered the basic question: why are you so determined to build a piece of junk, when it's so easy to build something that isn't? Do you actively dislike boats that are strong, pretty and sail well?

If you build the boat the way you want to build it, the question won't be how fast you get from Island 1 to Island 2; it'll be whether you ever make it to Island 2 at all.

But I'm not really worried about your safety -- because between your ignorance and your refusal to learn, you'll never get a boat built anyway.

 

Let's merge this thread with the one about building the Ark.

 

No sail plan yet, if it will be junk rig, lug sail, balanced lug sail.

That about splitting the plywood with nails is very true and if that happens then it is chine logs or only epoxy. I never thought I would have to convince anyone that a rectangular shape was easier than a curved shape to build.

 

Hi John,
Leo has put a great effort in that software and was enormously generous for giving it away for free. Many academic works have been done and many technical papers have been written thanks to capabilities of Michlet. I can also bet that many designers have made money by using it, as well as I could bet that they didn't share any cent of it with Leo.
So it would be really nice if, at least, people avoided to abuse or deride Leo's generosity. Because that's how the above words sound to me.
And I also hope that you don't do your everyday job for free either.

Cheers

 

Does anyone else have fears for safety when you read these two together? 5 hour passages between islands and plywood nailed together in the end grain?

I hope you will not be taking passengers.

I think this guy is a troll.

 

Wait, if I used the software for free to make hulls and sold those hulls for millions then I would be more respectful than asking in a forum? How?

I said chine logs or epoxy, instead of nails, read again.

 

How can you expect to convince people who've actually built boats, when you haven't? When you build small craft in fairly traditional ways, the curves pop up automatically; you'd be hard put to keep them out. For an extremely simple example, look over my thread on building a flat bottomed canoe with my son a couple of years ago.

http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/wo...ation/building-flat-bottomed-canoe-33266.html

We built it with 1x12 boards, a sheet of plywood, and some scrap pieces of oak I had laying around. And all the pretty curves just showed up by themselves, when we started bending the boards around a center mold.





How could your jigsaw puzzle of flat pieces be easier than that?

Here's the completed boat, loaded up for an afternoon of solo fishing. Making it an enclosed hull for half a catamaran would've been easier than finishing it as an open hull; we could've just left solid molds in it to make compartments, and added a full plywood deck.

 

You will need these.

 

The software was generously given to you by the author for free. That was his choice, and we are all grateful for that. At least I am. Asking the author to also do the calculations for free (why for free?) is a form of disrespect towards him. He too has bills to pay, just as you do.

It is also formally disrespectful if the request is not preceded by "Would you be so kind to..." and ended with "...please".

 

Hey Troy, that is a nice looking minimalist boat. You built that with very little fuss and expense and it turned out to be a real boat. Good on you.

I expect that the paint job probably took more time than the build.

 

It's kind of like sticking your thumb out for a free ride, and telling the driver who stops that you'd like him to carry your luggage over and load it in the car for you.

 

Thank you. We had fun building it, too. But I'll admit it took longer than you might think -- partly because we built it during some murderously hot weather.

 

If the builder is only concerned with it floating and doesn't care if it looks a bit rough, a boat like the one you describe can be built in a day and will be efficient and structurally sound.

The fact that John can't understand this point is pretty good evidence that he's never tried to build anything at all. I think this is why he's convinced he's right. He simply has no ability to realise that he could be wrong.

 

John,

The Tornado catamaran that was suggested (free plans) has been reliably timed at 25 Kts.

Stick that in your slow.

I said I was leaving but this is so painful seeing so much ignorance that I just couldn't resist. Sorry.