Affordable seaworthy cruiser

Yes, and will try to get a jpeg as well.

As far as the build goes it is basically ready for fiberglass and paint which is onsite however the weather needs to warm up. A-frame made it through the winter mostly intact though with two of the 16' 2x4 breaking. The structure attracted for some reason lots of snow and it built up on the East side to up over my head. Its seems that while working during those really cold days the snow melted and turned to ice which eventually put tons of weight on. So at this moment still waiting for it to melt off.

Some clarification regarding prismatic coefficient which I previously stated was .49 is really the block coefficient and actually .50 so would make the prismatic closer to the .51-.52 range. Did do a waterplane measurement previously but from memory its somewhere in the range of .65-.67 also if you guys remember my comparison of waterplane areas up fwd. compared to about 16 notable designs (equalizing station spacing) there was only the Bolger AS96 that had more area and mostly because of the upswept forefoot which brought the wider sections aft into the calculation. So eventhough Jubilee looks very fine measurements seem within reason.

 

The good ship "Rise from the dead on the third day" is sixty six feet overall & eleven feet maximum beam. That's very narrow!

I learned about "plank on edge" yachts a couple of days ago when I watched a video of the 1897 gaff cutter "Sayonara". Most of the time she was heeled over at 45 degrees. There goes the crockery.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZiivwtQ_9k

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sayonara_Yacht_1897

H/T to Gavin Atkin. http://intheboatshed.net/2012/02/18...eautiful-victorian-style-plank-on-edge-yacht/

 

Which brings us to the second drawing-my take on Buehlers Idlewild and some background on the two boats.

Previously I had tried a V-shape hull form however the displacement figures approached the 18,000-20,000# which seemed excessive. This was mostly due to taking George's "advice" to keep the chines below the WL for "less disturbance". This and my hesitation to build a log shaft is how eventually the box keel was adopted to my design in order for the inboard engine to be used. So now the boat is lighter but with probably the same WA as the heavier V-shape.

A few supposed advantages to box keel concept is 1.) building boat right side up 2.) less of an incline to shaft and easier to go through bulkheads rather than solid wood. 3.) Less displacement.

So I did evaluations using mostly Bolger's box keel idea's since he was one of the few if only one found designing displacement types but his lines seem very intricate to bring to a practical way of building. I still have not completely disregarded box keels but this latest design seems to have offset those benefits with a gains in less WA (but slightly higher displacement) and easier and less expensive build process. It remains to be seen in actual use but I think the box keel on Jubilee will be a very stabilizing factor and give it good qualities at sea which at this time are hard to quantify because of so little information available about them.

 

Just saw your post Pericle,

Here are my takes on that. If you compare to the circumnavigating Idlewild which is what I hope this "very preliminary design" is aimed at improving in regards to the rolling issues as Ben Gray did mention at one time while crossing the Southern Ocean a high heel of about 40 degree.

First, there is considerably less windage overall other than in the aft deck area. Second, slightly decreased deadrise. Third, taking away the cutaway, the keel is as big in area as it can be to help reduce rolling considering the 36" limit I put on draft. Fourth, as you can see the interior shows that frames will be exposed rather than building interior arrangements on top of them, this brings down the CG. This would be bearable to live with as it conforms to man's body as narrow at the base and might even be found useful for bracing points along with easier inspection and maybe even mental comfort seeing them. There might be slight steps to make sole more level and keel bolts would have to be countersunk.

 

Bolger's Loose Moose II design carries 3000 pounds of lead ballast, the Advanced Sharpie has 2000 pounds of lead ballast. In both cases the lead is inside, amidships, in the lowest area of the hull.

 

Masts for the usual get home deal and steadying effect of about 500 SA , masts about 40' AWL. Going forward I would have a taught jack line to attach the minimum sized lanyard. This also further eliminates windage and higher CG. also reduces costs. The aft deck would be very secure being within the ship, 48" high rails/lines with plenty of area, thus other than emergency anchoring really no reason to go fwd.

Door hatch to interior when shut minimizes interfering lights at night and would be as tight as a bean can. Eventually living aboard is in the plans and something like this I think would fulfill my minimum requirements. Hope to get JPEGS.

Peace.

 

Here is JPEG

 

The pictures, or drawings, loaded fine.

Well done on the build, not all of us actually build our designs, though I am building a much smaller 14' sailing Dinghy

I assume the hull showen in build is the flat bottomed one. Should be fast and economical, though probably not very fast to windward under sail. I am reminded however that gentlemen do NOT sail to windward.

Under power it should be very comfortable, though be careful not to 'drive' too windward into high seas too fast. Slow and steady will be more comfortable.

Rolling in a cross, one beam sea can be controled well with the sails set 'hard' as well.

Once again congratulations on starting you build, and well done.

 

As we have been discussing for 82 pages goodwills design is just as stable on its side as its bottom because of a low metacentre(result of 1 to 6 beam ratio and a waterplane of .65 )so without a ballasted keel I do not believe its stable from a design point of view .Noahs ark I would presume may have been close to 100% waterplane ( not unlike oil tanker) In the past I did have goodwills design in free ship but that laptops in storage .So just like Red Baron aka Baden without ballast probably not a good idea to launch it

 

Some time ago I read about a trick one guy did to cut down on sanding.

He took sheet plastic of a type that wouldn't stick to curing epoxy and after applying the epoxy he covered the boat with the plastic and vigorously squeegeed/rollered out all the air bubbles and also compressed the fiberglass and epoxy at the same time. I don't recall if he then used a shop-vac based vacuum bag set up on top, he might not have, of that but it probably couldn't hurt. Once the epoxy had cured he peeled off the plastic and the surface was much fairer just at that point, the texture of the fiberglass having been essentially suppressed in the pictures he showed.

The end result was a lot less sanding to get the desired finish, and more of the glass and epoxy he'd paid for still on the boat where it would do some good.

Another guy who was building a Bolger Champlain, and who sadly didn't live to complete her, mixed unpigmented aluminum power into to epoxy in place of paint and said it helped him see where he'd spread the epoxy too. It seemed like a neat trick. Aluminum powder comes in pigmented form but I've no clue about how durable the pigments are or how much more than plain they cost (or even if they can be successfully mixed in with the epoxy as he did). He had a thread about the build on Wooden Boat forums: http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?101886-Building-Bolgers-quot-Champlain-quot

 

Rurudyne,

That chap was John Blazy. The technique is also used for Payson butt joints. The plastic film trade mark is Mylar.

http://duckworksmagazine.com/03/r/articles/glass/bottom.htm

Clear Mylar is best, but at £10 for 10 metres, beggars cannot be choosers.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Silver-Myla...8&qid=1426872605&sr=8-1&keywords=silver mylar

 

Derek Kelsall used that technique when he built GB2 in 1971

Or use peel ply

I agree with NZboy

RW

 

Thanks!

It looks like a real time saver.

 

You can reuse the Mylar if it's peeled off carefully. My son & I used it to create a smooth & shiny surface when we cast our decorative concrete kitchen work tops face down. Result looked like glass. However, we then ground them to expose the decorative aggregates, before coating with epoxy. A hot air paint stripper applied with care, causes any bubbles to burst & smooth out. Imagine such a ferro-concrete transom on a skiff.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=d...rce=univ&ei=IWwMVYT2BM7MPe_LgeAJ&ved=0CDgQsAQ

 

That sharp angle in the forefoot is going to be extremely hard to plank. You may steam the planks, but usually it ends up being a spot where the fasteners first fail. A curve of as large a radius as possible would solve the problem