Affordable seaworthy cruiser

Discussion in 'Boat Design' started by goodwilltoall, Jul 31, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. SamSam
    Joined: Feb 2005
    Posts: 3,899
    Likes: 200, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 971
    Location: Coastal Georgia

    SamSam Senior Member

    I'm not sure what you mean by 'lower aspect', but a full length keel will tend to keep you going in a straight line and offer more resistance to turning and tacking by being farther out on the ends where they get more leverage to resist lateral movement. The boat can't pivot as easily around a central point such as a centerboard or leeboards or a fin keel. Your old leeboard scheme would allow easier turning and tacking than the full length box beam.
     
  2. latestarter
    Joined: Jul 2010
    Posts: 402
    Likes: 51, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 233
    Location: N.W. England

    latestarter Senior Member

  3. frank smith
    Joined: Oct 2009
    Posts: 980
    Likes: 14, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 185
    Location: usa

    frank smith Senior Member

    It would reduce the ultimate stability.
     
  4. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,857
    Likes: 400, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: Control Group

    hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

  5. frank smith
    Joined: Oct 2009
    Posts: 980
    Likes: 14, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 185
    Location: usa

    frank smith Senior Member

  6. goodwilltoall
    Joined: Jul 2010
    Posts: 844
    Likes: 26, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 31
    Location: nation of Ohio

    goodwilltoall Senior Member

    Greetings,

    The design can work and will work with final adjustments made. Had asked certain questions and if you cant answer those quit complaining.
     
  7. apex1

    apex1 Guest

    No,


    but YOU will never get that!
     
  8. goodwilltoall
    Joined: Jul 2010
    Posts: 844
    Likes: 26, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 31
    Location: nation of Ohio

    goodwilltoall Senior Member

    Yes the design will work.

    Settled to use full keel with the lower COG. That will allow more sail area than the original 600SF with only two masts. Keel version shown on drawing can be ballasted upto 7,500lbs if necessary using previously described technique to build. This will give overall draft about 2'-4". Masts will carry bermuda sails with 35.5 luff rather than the previous 30.5'.

    Peace.
     
  9. frank smith
    Joined: Oct 2009
    Posts: 980
    Likes: 14, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 185
    Location: usa

    frank smith Senior Member

    Are you going to uses inboard or outboard power?

    If you go with a box keel , you could also have a drop keel in a trunk on the side. some nice used aluminum light poles would be good for masts.

    How thick are the sides and bottom going to be?

    looks like you will have a living area of about 180,sq ft , thats not bad .
     
  10. apex1

    apex1 Guest

    Senseless...........................
    you are again completely smitten in details which one could discuss 20 steps later on the way.
    But the point to start is not even thought about.

    You will never grasp, that your knowledge is not even sufficient to hammer a proven design together, but you dream about redesigning a already poor performer to 5 times the original size.

    Your level of hubris makes it senseless for everyone to contribute here in a worthwile way.

    Go, design and build your junk, but don´t install a VHF radio!
    SAR efforts are paid by tax payers, you should waste your money, not theirs.
     
  11. frank smith
    Joined: Oct 2009
    Posts: 980
    Likes: 14, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 185
    Location: usa

    frank smith Senior Member

    I think your estimate of hull depth is not right . If I use a LWL of 42' , the draft is 21" at 1/2" per foot rocker . I dont think this is enough, and the rocker might end up at 5/8" per foot or higher. I think you still have to get this hull deeper in the water . That that means more displacement and more ballast.
     
  12. frank smith
    Joined: Oct 2009
    Posts: 980
    Likes: 14, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 185
    Location: usa

    frank smith Senior Member

    Please help us figure this out .
     
  13. Pericles
    Joined: Sep 2006
    Posts: 2,015
    Likes: 141, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1307
    Location: Heights of High Wycombe, not far from River Thames

    Pericles Senior Member

    Who mentioned Noah?

    Once I started reading this thread from page 15, I could not stop wondering if Noah has been reincarnated as goodwilltoall. To which end, I feel obliged to offer this link, as gwta needs all available help. It's all there, both education & entertainment.:D :D :D

    http://www.worldwideflood.com/jsmenu/full_menu.htm
     
  14. frank smith
    Joined: Oct 2009
    Posts: 980
    Likes: 14, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 185
    Location: usa

    frank smith Senior Member

    This is good
     

  15. wardd
    Joined: Apr 2009
    Posts: 897
    Likes: 37, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 442
    Location: usa

    wardd Senior Member

    Code:
    Quote:
    Noah's Ark Design Parameters
    
    The Ark is not supposed to sink, so hull integrity and stability are essential. It is prudent to ensure a safe margin in any sea state likely to be encountered, especially considering the magnitude of the floodwaters and the (presumed) novelty of the vessel. Both these factors would drive the project to use a high safety factor - to err on the conservative side. The job had to be done thoroughly. 
    
    1. Hull integrity
    
    Watertightness (E) The ship must not leak excessively, or take water onboard. A sound hull, storm hatches etc
    
    Strength (E) The ship must not break in half or flex in rough seas. Wave bending moment, wave slamming, torsion etc.
    2. Seakeeping
    
    Stability (E) The ship must not capsize - a combination of roll stability and broaching avoidance.
    
    Seakindliness (D) The ship motions should easy on its crew and gear. Accelerations, angle of roll etc
    3. Voyage Requirements
    
    Essential needs met (E) The ship must meet the essential needs of cargo and crew during the voyage, Space, ventilation etc
    
    Risks Managed (D) Fire hazards, access and handling issues, repairs etc.
    4. Construction
    
    Buildable (E) It must be possible to construct the ship using available technology. Wood construction, manual labor etc
    
    Costs Optimized (D) The ship should require a minimum of materials and labor without jeopardizing any of the essential criteria.
    This is good

    what is not appreciated about those that believe in a literal flood is they believe that god would have kept the ark afloat no matter what

    so all the discussion about the arks design and construction is irrelevant
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.