Realistic scantilings

I thought I would jump in on this as a Brent Swain 36 owner. I will just try to keep to what I know and not what I think since there has been too much of that….I will probably fail. .

As an amateur, I started construction in1986. With no prior experience other than building a couple of plywood dinghies, I worked as Evan Shaler’s helper and we built the hull, deck, keel and rudder. We had this completed in 4 weeks. Evan had helped build or built himself 9 other origami designs at the time. We took our time, 8 or 9 hour days, did not work weekends, and had a few days off when it rained. I know Brent would have done it much faster, probably 2 weeks, but what the hell, I was learning. Someone else nearby with the same experience built a Van de Stadt 34 footer and he said it took him 1 ½ years to get to the same point. I know this is anecdotal evidence, but like I said, I am trying to stick to what I know.

What else do I know?

I know that a “professional” boatbuilder with many years of experience told me that Brent Swain boats could “split wide open” and don’t build one. I was lucky. I knew just enough to ignore his unprofessional comments. He was at best, ignorant, at worst lying. Either way, he was unethical and wrong. I am so glad I never took his advice. If I had taken his advice and gone for conventional framed construction, I probably would have never finished my boat because I would have either run out of time, will or money. Looking back on it, it probably bugged the “pro” like hell that an amateur could come along a build a boat faster than him.

I also know that the result of this origami construction is that I have a tough, 36 foot boat that has huge tanks, carries an incredible amount of stores and yet is unbelievably tough and fast. I have cruised now for almost 10 years offshore (Canada to New Zealand and points in between) and I have never seen ANY 36 or 40 foot boat cruising that can do what she can. I have seen light racing boats that may have been faster but never a boat with the same carrying capacity or comfort level. She regularly keeps up with most cruising boats 40 to 45 feet that carry the same amount of gear. As an example, I have twice gone 1000 miles in 6 and a half days. I passed a 65 foot boat on one of these trips and beat it to my destination by 1 day so it was obviously less than ideal conditions or the 65 footer would have pulled away. I have anchored and sailed in extreme conditions that I wouldn’t wish on anyone yet have always felt as safe as I possibly could. She sails very well to windward and steers straight both upwind and down. I have never experienced any flex or deflection in anything (other than myself ) and guests have commented on how secure the boat felt. I also have had many comments on how good she looks.

As far as engineering goes, I can’t believe that there would ever be a debate about whether Brent’s boats were strong enough as some have implied. Brent’s boats are the toughest boats I have ever been on. I have crewed about 10 thousand miles on other boats and there has never been any comparison to the feeling I have when sailing Brent’s design. There is absolutely no question in my mind that his boats are tough but if you really want to know if Brent’s designs are strong enough, buy his plans or buy his book for $20. Other designers sell study plans for more money and with far less information than his book. He may not give all the numbers to everybody’s satisfaction, but I know they are there. To those demanding specific engineering data, if I demanded all the engineering data from Bruce Farr, I know he wouldn’t give it to me and probably tell me to take a flying leap. Why should Brent? We are talking about metal boats. It’s not rocket science, it’s all been done before. Many of the demands for specifics in these postings are just veiled attacks, in my opinion. If you want to debate origami, how can you really do it unless you have read his book or actually seen one being built? By the way, I get no commission .


So, if we are debating strength/scantlings are we talking about origami techniques or frameless construction? The two are really separate issues, in my opinion. Frameless construction has been done by many designers, as we all know, and been well proven. I know of frameless designs to 65 feet. I think the limit to origami is just how big of plate you could move around. A 50 or 60 foot plate, cutting, darting, and pulling it together, would be a tricky thing to do. It has been done, however, with success. As the panels get bigger, you just throw in a few more stringers to add support and/or go to thicker plate. Adding more chines also probably helps with working the large plates. What’s the big deal? Why would the engineering be different? If you don’t like it, then you must not like any large, frameless boat. In my opinion, Brent’s origami technique (through many years of refinement) is merely a method of doing a frameless boat in a faster amount of time. If done properly, it also has the added benefit of round sections in the bow and stern. I don’t see why the engineering is such a big deal. Anyone who says the panels on origami are unsupported doesn’t know what they are talking about. If there is less curve to a panel, then more support (stringers) are needed. On a larger, versus a smaller panel, you would need more stringers. This is true of any form of frameless construction. Of course with any material coming from a sheet, there are limitations in the shape you can come up with, but then boats are compromises, aren’t they? The shapes, I don’t think, have much if anything to do with the strength, with the plate thicknesses and hull sizes we are talking about here.

As far as I know, Brent has never advocated any design larger than the 36 footer. He has the 40 foot design but never pushed it. Brent advocates a simple lifestyle and doesn’t think anyone needs a boat bigger than 36 or 40 feet. As far as I know, he has no designs of 50 or 60 feet. If you think frameless designs of 50 or 60 feet won’t work there are many designs out there to prove you wrong. There are also origami designs that large. In my opinion, there is no difference in the engineering, just the construction technique.

As far as numbers go, engineering definitely has its place. Practically, however, I know enough about engineering to know it has its limits . It is as much based on experience as science. I have taken enough engineering courses to know that there is usually a long engineering calculation and then K factor is thrown in at the final moment to make the formula result look right. The K factor comes from experience and is changed over time. Every engineer has his own opinion on what this K (fudge) factor should be. That is probably why keels seem to be falling off regularly. I see many “engineered” boats that are laughable. I now have enough experience (hard knocks and intellectual osmosis) to know if something doesn’t look right to my eye, it probably isn’t. Don’t get me wrong, engineering has its place, but given a choice, I would take the opinion of the guy with many years experience over the engineer with the *** worn on his pants any day.

Brent is one of the few designers who actually lives on and sails his own boats. Brent is very opinionated. I could see how he might sometimes rub people the wrong way. Don’t we all at one time or another? He actually does what he preaches. How many designers have crossed the Pacific nine times in their own design? I am no lap dog, I don’t agree with everything Brent says, but in my experience, when it comes to boats, he has almost always proved right.

At times, I think the debate in this thread has smacked of elitism and snobbery. The hillbilly comment illustrated this. That kind of comment belongs with the champagne set and the super yachts. Yeah, I used chain blocks to pull the plates of my hull together. I also used logs from the beach to lift the ends up as the plates came together. So what? I think it’s brilliant to use local items that work and cost nothing. What are we really trying to do? Isn’t it the end result that is important? We want to build good, safe tough boats that do what they are intended. In Brent’s case, this happens to be an offshore sailboat. Brent’s version of it just happens to be built quicker (and thus cheaper) than any other I have seen and also probably faster and tougher (my opinion). They have survived extreme conditions by regular, normal people like me.

I can see why some of the professional boat-builders feel threatened. It’s hard to admit someone may have a better way if it might affect your livelihood. It’s amazing how many origami boats have been built in the Pacific Northwest. The truly amazing thing to me, however, is how many are finished. To many people start and then stop. The fact that an amateur can build something so quickly really increases the likelihood of a boat being finished.


Finally, if anyone thinks I am making this up, I am happy to send pictures of my boat under construction in Canada, cruising in the South Pacific or New Zealand.

Wow, I just read my message……did I ever rant….I hope it had something to do with metal scantlings…..my apologies.

Cheers, Paul

 

Mike Johns, Brent Swain, et al

I wrote a long-winded post, in response to the ongoing discussion, but it disappeared. Just as well, I was feeling rather heated.

Mike Johns, you're right in pointing out Brent's apparent myopic view of boat construction methods. As a person, Brent can be argumentative & abrasive, but one does not need to be best friends with a designer in order to appreciate his designs. On the other hand, I have viewed many boats of Brent's design - or designed by others whom have simply copied Brent's designs - and have found them to be as well-found as any in their class. I spent a couple of weeks in Brent's "neck of the woods", welding on a 60 footer that was constructed in the origami method, and would not hesitate to sail that same boat anywhere. If you have followed the construction of these boats, you will note that transverse framing is attained by engine bed, tankage, etc. . The benefit of the origami construction method is that one can realize the completion of the steelwork in a much shorter time than when using the more traditional method of construction.

I am a shipyard welder & plater, as well as, a certified welding inspector. I have been working in the industry since 1982 and have built two 83 foot fishing boats(1991/93) - while in the southern Philippines - based on my modifications of a Denis Ganley design. When I first became interested in Brent's method, I bought his earlier book and had my father review it for me, as he was a retired metallurgical engineer, whom had began his working life as a shipyard boilermaker. Though we each felt that we would prefer the use of different welding consumables or processes than that of Brent's choice, neither of us felt that there was a flaw in his construction method.

One must remember that Lloyds & ABS offer minimum standards for building commercial class marine vessels. Brent's boats have been built & sailed in all corners of the world & - in my humble opinion - are well-designed. One really needs to see these boats built to understand how one can build a top-notch sailboat quickly. Lofting? Not that I have seen. The bottom line with these boats is that; if one wishes to spend much less time building, but does not wish to sacrifice seaworthiness, build a "Swain". Having said this, I am planning to build a few Glen-L designed sailboats, starting next fall, in Asia, these boats are for production and I have chosen to go this route because Brent does not wish to design a 55 to 60 footer for me. For my own boat, I plan on building Brent's 40 footer.
Mike G.

 

Paul yes and and it deserves a reply since you are on the attack.

Your comments in red, my reply in black.

Brent’s boats are the toughest boats I have ever been on………. there has never been any comparison to the feeling I have when sailing Brent’s design. ……….. there is absolutely no question in my mind ……..

This sounds a bit like vindicating a personal choice.

That there is no question in your mind is indisputable, so here is a question that you should always ask the true believer ;

What evidence would it take for you to change your view?

Other designers sell study plans for more money and with far less information than his book.

I’d be very interested to read it . Other designers are probably able to furnish far more construction detail and assist is getting the vessel into commercial survey if required.

To those demanding specific engineering data, if I demanded all the engineering data from Bruce Farr, I know he wouldn’t give it to me and probably tell me to take a flying leap.

Farr’s office will supply whatever you ask for if you are buying one of their designs. When we re-engineered one of their keels they were immensely helpful.

Why should Brent?
Beacause he makes the claims on a boat design forum.
If Brent posts here and makes bold statements and attacks that are contrary or novel then he should reasonably expect to defend his position. Otherwise it’s just chest beating advertising. If you look at the posts you will see that Brent was not defending but attacking rudely and abrasively .

Many of the demands for specifics in these postings are just veiled attacks, in my opinion.

Even in light of what I said above?

If you want to debate origami, how can you really do it unless you have read his book or actually seen one being built? .

I’m not debating origami. Read my posts……… please.
I was debating the construction of small sailing vessels for blue water use. And I have a lot of experience in the design construction and operation of such boats.

So, if we are debating strength/scantlings are we talking about origami techniques or frameless construction? The two are really separate issues, in my opinion.

Well it would be good to stick to the specifics of the thread which was a discussion with Brent about his own assertions of the suitability of his method. In my interest particularly was his assertion of the suitability of significantly larger vessels to his frameless technique. Of which I have some serious doubts.

Frameless construction has been done by many designers, as we all know, and been well proven. I know of frameless designs to 65 feet.

Can you give some details of just how ‘frameless’ they are since this varies considerably.

As the panels get bigger, you just throw in a few more stringers to add support and/or go to thicker plate. Adding more chines also probably helps with working the large plates. What’s the big deal? Why would the engineering be different? If you don’t like it, then you must not like any large, frameless boat.

You should never tell people what you think that they think since its just your prejudiced view. I may have considered this far more than you are aware. You should also go back over my posts and address specific statements and not parse the nuances.

Anyone who says the panels on origami are unsupported doesn’t know what they are talking about.

The Patronizing know it all approach just doesn’t wash sorry

As far as I know, Brent has never advocated any design larger than the 36 footer.

What! Read the thread and look at his other posts on other threads in this forum.


As far as numbers go, engineering definitely has its place. …..
Practically, however, I know enough about engineering to know it has its limits.

Firstly you need to say why you think you are qualified to comment like this. Secondly maybe you know too little to really know its limits and make up for what you don’t know with prejudice. Some examples would support your view and prevent this conclusion.

there is usually a long engineering calculation and then K factor is thrown in at the final moment to make the formula result look right. Every engineer has his own opinion on what this K (fudge) factor should be.

What courses have you been doing ? This is not a valid observation just a rationalization for the dismissal of something you find threatening perhaps.

I see many “engineered” boats that are laughable. engineering has its place, but given a choice, I would take the opinion of the guy with experience over the engineer any day.

Everyone has an opinion, you really think you can design a structure safely on opinions? How did you arrive at this conclusion.

Also in this blimpish view of the world you seem to float over the fact that engineering as a profession has a vast amount of experience otherwise known as knowledge. It beats opinions hands down any day.

 

Mike thanks for your post It would be great if you stuck around and contributed to the forum, it s always nice to have experienced people contributing.

Some very large simple chine boats and barges have and are built to similar methods (plating first) but always a significant amount of framing goes in after the plate has been pulled into place . There is propably far more knowledge on this technique amongst Naval architects particulalry in Holland than people are aware and I have seen some very large vessels under construction by this method built on a flat concrete surface.

Brents origionality is not up for question, his smaller designs are maybe even compliant with current light steel scantlings, but I will come back to that perhaps later since I have to work too and all this takes some time.

Cheers



To the newcomers

Presumably this thread has been mentioned on another forum or group very recently given the sudden influx of new members straight to this thread.

Would one of you be kind enough to provide a link ? Be interesting to see what stirred the response.


Thankyou. Its on

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/message/17626

 

Mike,

Mike, you are right. I ranted a bit too much and I am obviously opinionated. Nothing I wrote was intended to be an attack.... defense perhaps. If you go back to the beginning of the thread, who threw the first stones? You have to understand that many of the arguments I hear about the origami process I heard years ago. History repeats itself. In all seriousness, this would be much simpler if you or anyone else in doubt actually read Brents book. You don't have to agree with it (I am sure you won't), but I encourage you to please read it. It's only a few bucks and full of information that could be applied to any boat, whether its origami or not.

Now go ahead, call me too zealous, call me a believer. I can take it. I am as tough as my boat....

Cheers, Paul

 

Good, finally a little bit of discussion, this is good. I quite welcome those new input in this strange action reaction thread.

I've been following and interested by this thread from its start (I was actually starting to get bored though); so I'd like to resume a bit the origins of this discussion as the triggers of it don't seem to be understood or have been distorted.

This could be long, I'm pretty much doing some match comments on the first two pages.

The first post was a question from Arvy about realistic scantlings for his design. Arvy points out he wants his boat classed in a class society. We don't need to assume it's by snobery, I get that he simply wants to make sure that, if needed down the road, the boat will be classed.

Now let's get to Brent. He posted the fourth post.

Well, I can read here the first attack to "they" who ever "they" are and no real response to Arvy's problem just Brent's usual song.
Arvy than answers politely about his interest in class society and nicely asks: "How do the origami steel boats get classed by the societies as they don't follow their rules?"
Which leads to Brents first side jump. ???? (see me shake my head).

And directly followed by his next Brenting and attack to other building methods.

Lazyjack sees Brent coming. Can I point out that Brent comes back out of the blues, with these exact same comments again and again in every thread that has somewhat something to do with steel boat structures (and sometimes not even). Just go see Brents posts by visiting his profile. Usually his Brenting is ignored but eventually some response was meant to come.


Land lubber states "Origami boats would not pass any class survey!" Which in my opinion is foolish to say if he doesn't have details about the boat the origami boat could well be framed or even meet proper sections modulus for its size. (I say that but I could well have made the exact same comment as a reaction to Brents on going rants)
Never less Brent comes back with more foolishness and disdainful comments.

And the next post is Brent again, with the same comments coming back some more. Punching once and again, and again, until he gets a reaction.

And now only is when Mike feels it's time to hop in and he does it an admirable manner, I'd say as a gentlemen. He does it very objectively and amazingly cold headed considering the low attacks he gets. I've been keeping myself from responding as I don't feel able to keep such good manners in response to Brent.

For those who get the impression that Mike Jones is anti Swain boats, here's some quotes from him. I'd say this also describes how I feel in response to Brent Swain.

Post 17

On an other note, I find funny the comments about engineers and NA's elitism and so on. We are here on a Boat design forum where some very reputable career designers exchange and help us (I'm not eng or NA) with our questions and problems. Do you know many professionals that give away so much info and help for free just by passion for what they do.
Many people have asked favors, help that would be charged in any office and got there answers. Many nobodies come with original ideas that are all welcome and developed with the help of those "elites" with no looking down or degrading comments, simple opinion and objective analysis. The fact there are explanations we don't understand doesn't mean they are looking at us from high, it only means we may have to do a bit more research or ask more questions.

Cheers,

Murielle

 

This is fairly unlikely, but may have been possible 10 or more years ago. Like all government bureaucracies Transport Canada has myriad rules and exemptions for various undertakings. The requirements for a vessel to take 4 passengers on a day cruise in the Gulf Islands are very different than those for unlimited ocean service.

I would bet there is no written record of the above statement by a TC inspector. To be certified as a small passenger vessel the owner must submit full construction drawings to TC, these are examined by a TC Naval Architect and approval or (usually) required changes are made. There is no verbal statement of approval.

Also there are no construction scantling rules in the Canada Shipping Act. Vessels subject to approval are to be built to a "recognized construction standard by a approved certification body, (ie ABS, Lloyd's, etc.)" If Brent's construction method was to be approved by TC, he would have had to submit calculations showing equivalencey to a recognized standard.

 

My apologies, thank, & how I came to be here

Murielle,
You're, of course, correct. As a former member of the origamiboats group, I am used to most discussions going sideways and often get caught up in the degradation from topic to "spitting". My apologies for having skipped over the important parts.

Mike Johns,
First; I thank you for the warm welcome. Second; I still review the posts on the origamiboats group(open to public), as I often learn a new trick or two. When reviewing posts, yesterday, I came across Brent's mention of a "Mike" who "Back-stabbed Alex(Christie)". I have no doubt that Brent was referring to me, perhaps, confusing me with Mike Johns. Succinctly, I felt that Alex & Brent were misrepresenting the quality of a boat shell that they built & that Alex had for sale. I had been contacted by a couple of members, asking my opinion of this same project boat & felt that it was unfair for the moderator of that group - Alex - to use the group to sell a less than stellar boat to a new, unsuspecting member. I withdrew from the group over two issues; constant arguments over welding consumables/processes, and; after two & a half years of sitting out in the elements, Alex painted over the rusting shell - no sanding, blasting, etc. - and continued to push it on the un suspecting members. I do not agree with members of groups trying to screw over other members.

I am not a designer, architect, etc., and therefore, most discussions of coefficients, stress dynamics, etc., go over my head. I feel that most designers put forth seaworthy marine vessels, therefore, the anomallies usually surface in the quality of construction. As a builder, I put far more value into the advice of the designer than I do Lloyds, ABS, Veritas, etc.

Mike Graham

 

I am the one who made the hillbilly remark and I actually directed this towards Brent himself, however, should I have offended anyone else by this I apologize.

Having said that, Brent either has no manners, or an ego as big as the Titanic and I believe the inability to debate constructively with others. Brent has a sarcastic way to address matters and more so, a poisonous tongue towards any professional boatbuilders. I am referring to a previous thread about sandblasting; http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?t=21991&highlight=sandblasted

Here Brent was his usual self in spreading his poison towards properly engineered boat/designs and professional boatbuilder. One can take only so much and I responded eventually in a nice way and add this comment to end my post on the second page.

Not being raised to be rude to people, I actually apologized to Brent publicly on the thread for that statement, and in hindsight, I was not even rude to the man. As it may, he never even acknowledged my apology....
Hence, listening to his senseless ranting, the tone of his responses and explanations at times, I stick to my comment...and to illustrate

GEEZ, to have positive righting moment beyond 170 degrees This is an insult to intelligence. Most cruising boats have a vanishing point of stability(where positive righting moment end for the ininformed) from around 120 - 140 degrees - I am currently building a 43ft steel boat by one of the worlds best steel designers, and the point of vanishing stabilty is 128 degrees.

As for the v/d Stadt frameless designs; I had built a few frameless 34 footers and can vouch for the stiffness of that design. However, it must be noted that is a multi-chine hull with quite smallish longitudinal panels on chines. Added to these hulls are quite a fair bit of longitudinal stringers, transverse floors to the hull plating and a couple of mayor bulkheads. In addition the transverse chainplate anchors are serious pieces of construction to spread the loads into the hull.
In addition, it has some decent angle iron deck frames with closely space stringers to complete the picture.

 

realistic scantlings

Justifying one's choice is exactly what Mike Johns is obviously trying to do. Hard to admit you screwed up in the middle of a long , tedious framing futility extercise.
I never advocate boats over 50 ft for cruising. I just say it can be , and has been sucessfully done using origami methods, with excellent results.
You say certification bodys are smarter than you or I? Speak for yourself. I've never been as smart as them when it come to designing very expensive round the world racing boats who's keels commonly fall off. None of mine have had their keels fall off. I guess that makes me not as smart as them.
As I have explained . I have done it the old fashioned way.
All boats lose all stabiility at 120 degrees? No . Only so called "Modern" boats do. I have the stability curve for the older Contessa 31 , which shows positive stability to beyond 170 degrees. It was common before beam became excessive and flat flush decks more common. Almost all the older designs have positive stability well beyond 120 degrees. English designer Angus Primrose , while crossing the Atantic in one of his beamier designs was capsized, and stayed that way for far to long before the boat righted itself. He later did some calculations and found that even a slight reduction in beam resulted in a huge improvement in ultimate stability.
What are transverse chainplate anchors for? To stop the relatively slight inward pressure of chainplates from crushing the 1/8th inch decks ( tensile and compression stength of 60,000 PSI ) inward? Duhhh???
This is an excelent example of the naivete of so called " Structural" members in imitation wooden boatbuilding in steel. Many of the designs of people who have never got their hands dirty building or cruising in steel boats are grossly overburdened by such foolishness , in time , money and redundant weight, components which were invented to deal with a material which had strength in one direction only( wood).
Brent

 

Thanks to all for their responses, and the apology, Wynand. I was afraid my comments about engineering in my original post may be taken out of context and it appears it may have happened. I want to make it clear that I have no beef with engineering or the design process. As I said, I merely wanted to point out its limits.


My apologies if this deviates a bit from the thread, but I am curious. There are obviously quite a few experienced people on this forum. I am certainly no expert but I have read many books on metal boat construction, yacht design and now built an origami boat. So there is lots written about conventional steel yacht construction but I know of only one book written on origami construction. So as professionals, is it not your duty to read that book, watch the DVD or at least have first (not second) hand knowledge before really commenting regarding origami? If you haven't done any of the above, shouldn't you learn about the competition, so to speak?

Thanks, Paul

 

Public Discourse about Boats

opusnz,

I've watched the thread and even posted once or twice as I've seen 'the Brent' in action before so his ill behavior was easily predictable.

What I think needs to be observed is that whenever anyone makes pronouncements as absolutes, and the Brent does this in almost any post, they need to be very informed or royalty.

Since the Brent is obviously ill informed about many items of life's broad spectrum I can only assume, and do so logically, that he is royalty.

Obviously, the Brent does not have an 'opinion' worth as much as yours or mine, or any of the posters here. Instead he, the Brent, has THE final say; "so be it", and "Amen" - as we'd associate historically with decrees of a monarch.

Opinions can be and are regularly debated and in that debate points are made and supported in logic or with repeatable references like math calculations, material testing, and experiences that are commonly held. Decrees are not debatable and do not need to be intellectually reviewable by others; they exist by Divine Right, if I recall my limited knowledge of English history.

It has been observed that many practicing professionals attend this discussion forum and their time is much more valuable to the Forum readers than more casual posters since they are educated and experienced in "matters marine". These practicing professional folks are willing to discuss with us, the less informed, many items; but they aren't willing subjects to self-proclaimed royalty making degrees that are irrational in presentation, and unsubstantiated in reality, especially if they're made as wild sweeping conditions of finality.

Skillful people are those who have worked to attain a level of competency combining both dexterity and knowledge through practice. If someone welds well, fits well, and builds boats well, say for example Wynand N, the work to attain this level of skill is not easily discounted when that person hears sweeping pronouncements instead of " I prefer" and "in my opinion..." as preface for someone's opinion.

I know that the Brent has built a some boats, and others have built his boats from his literature, which I have purchased and read, and as a mechanical contractor, welded boat builder in the past, and industrial designer; someone else's opinion is just that. I don't see the professional designers or builders posting here in any way shy of origami, which by the way is not the Brent's invention, concept or idea, what I see is an extremely patient and calm reply to the ranting(s) of a self-appointed monarch of all discourse about welded boats!

I purchased the video tape by Alex (I think Christie but don't recall the videographer's last name) of Brent tacking up one of his hulls and I can only say that the term "3rd world" comes to mind.

Will it float? I'll assume that it will, but would I want anything to do with something built with these slip-shod, coarse skilled, sloppy and un-workman like methods? No thanks- I'll pass.

Do I care if the Brent's 'final decree' is that other shapes/methods/designs are a waste of time? Nope. Do I care if the Brent decrees that his is the proverbial only way to 'steel boat heaven' (not a quote)? Nope. Do I care if he's rude and ill mannered and more than slightly irrational? Nope, but it seems he'd attract more adherents if he'd behave like he was from the civilized world and less like an "eye-ah-tole-ah" making pronouncements that are just his opinions.

I think we've all heard that opinions are like anatomy we've all got the same basic inventory? What is posted here is just very patient folks trying to keep a civil discourse and being interrupted by someone else who hasn't figured out the simplest manners for that conversation.

I don't read anyone of the 'pro's' initiate any of the diatribes, and I thought that Wynand N's "hillbilly" remark was because of the "close enough nail it" attitude prevalent in the entire B.Swain ideal of boatbuilding as exemplified by the book and video.

I have (past tense) welded as a certified pipe welder, CG certified in stick, MIG and TIG, and still burn a bit of wire or rod once in a while. I'd never allow someone with those limited skills and practices to be on one of my projects. The 'get by' or 'all you need' approach may be sufficient for some but not for me, thank you.

If the builder of his own boat wants to build before his welding or wood working is up to par then the boat will show that. But to pronounce, as the Brent does with regularity, that such a provision or method is all the is needed and "anything" else is worthless, isn't simply arrogance; it is pathetic.

I like the ideas the Brent brings to the discussion of how to build, many are very innovative, so I've bought and read his 'book' and tested many ideas with good benefit in some areas. the Brent has solved the design for a dynamite water maker, lots of clever fab. tricks, useful in many corners and a lot more. I welcome(d) the ideas and info but have had to reject the monarch's decrees; I am not, thankfully, his subject.

Last but not least in my rant, is the "cheapness factor" of the Brent's approach to building and this also recalls the hillbilly remark by Wynand N. The video of the 36'er by Alex begins with the Brent wandering in a scrap yard picking out bits of metal of parts that are to be incorporated in the subject boat. If the primary decision factor in building materials is cost alone- not the cost of ownership or value relative to the performance of the material or device then you have set the tone of the project.

With this tone there would be no Fedship, Riva, or modern yachts of Bristol Finish. I don't mind choosing the lesser of two quality products to economize, but I'm not impressed by the idea that cost is the only determination of value to the boat.

One of the main items I don't find a burden that requires economy is my time. I don't mind spending time doing a job well, and I like that way of spending time as I'm only a coasty, I don't cruise. So when the Brent pronounces that my time is wasted by following another method, design or shape- its clear (to use the Brent's own sweeping generalization methods here) the Brent doesn't like to build boats- but I do- so leave my time to me to determine what its best used to accomplish.

I'm in no hurry because if I get this one done I'll just have to start another one to keep me busy.

cheers,
kmorin

 

Murielle

Thanks and a fair and accurate summary.


Everyone
I was interested in the sudden influx and the pre-conceived opinions from people who obviously hadn't read the thread. Here's one post I was sent apparently made by Brent on Yahoo origami boats.


http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/message/17633

On 6/18/08, brentswain38 <brentswain38@...> wrote:

There is a guy called Mike on boatdesign.net who claims that none of
my designs have ever been built. I suspect that he is the same Mike
who stabbed Alex in the back. He seems to actually have people
believing him. I'd appreciate if any of you guys who have built and
cruised in my designs drop in and give some input. ....

Thanks
Brent


Re: Boatdesign.net
............
I don't do any other input on the site, but challenges have to be met.
Thanks
Brent


A follow-up post from someone calling himself Jim

Brent , i have stopped dropping in to that site due to the constant
backstabbing , architectural snobbery , and the appalling bad manners i find
whenever i do ; i am a genuine learner of boat design , who wants to build a
steel boat , and they just poo on one if a "basic" question is asked .

jim



_________________________________________________



I guess this says it all. It sets the scene for some of the input that appears so thoughtless in context of the full discussion.

Brent
This is unethical since what you posted was a complete fabrication. Both your statement , you have 161 posts on this site which hardly constitutes no other input , and you cannot support this other fiction , you are twisting the "is 200 boats realistic comments" into "none have been built" When you were fictionalizing things before I asked you "what is your game?" and now it is clear .

As for Jim I don't think he is telling the truth either. If he really had been treated so shabbily he will be able to post here with some experience to prove me wrong.

Note that this is moderated by Alex Christie that Mike Graham (Welder fitter) refers to in his post above. Thanks for that Mike.

 

Wynand

I missed Brents contributions to that thread unfortunately. I never get enough time to do this forum justice, I'm sure you find the same since we have other demands as well.

I thought that the Hillbilly comment was not offensive, you made it clear that it was just your own opinion and you even apologised for it when you made it. It just happened to be picked up, ironic really when we read Brents colorful langauge. I was surprised that it would become an issue.

In Australia a Hillbilly solution implies creativity and innovation with low cost materials and a definite lean towards function rather than form. I guess it is a case of a comment which can be as derogatory as the reader wishes to make it. I am sorry anybody took it as offensive.


KMorin
A great, relevant and very illustrative post. Thankyou


Tad
I had wondered about the in survey and also another; the USCG "approve of my boats' comments made by Brent before.

 

Murielle and Wynand N
Thankyou for the apology on the hillbilly comment.
Personaly I beleave anyone wanting to build a boat should build what they want and out of what ever material they are confortable using.
Welder/fitter
I am the one that first commented about what you said about Alex's 36 in origamiboats forum. Being contacted off forum to help evaluate a boat is one thing, Posting on the forum out of the blue youre opinion that it was a POS because of surface rust and a few waves here and there, saying the value was less than 1/2 the cost of materials was not to cool in my book, heck it was unfished tacked together. Your a welder awnser this how long would it have taken you to plumb up the hull clean and prep to weld and weld?
I think I am one of the ones you use to question me when someone asked me how I welded it and I would tell them. I am a self employed welder goin on about 25 years now and I have all the work I can handle by myself,Dairy, Farm,and pump outfit doing all there pipe work. If I didnt know what I was doing would I be still be in buisness and working for the same people? If I remenber corectly you allways said I did it wrong! Not everyone does things your way and if you cant handle that too bad.
Tom