Re: [bolger] Don't Disrespect the Martha Jane! (Resend)
In a message dated 4/12/2001 10:53:21 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
mzeiger@...writes:
<< Sad fact is, gentlemen (and ladies, if you're there) history is full
of boats that were not ideal. The vast majority of them provided
lifetimes of good sailing despite what some have now come to consider
the fatal flaw of not being self-righting >>
Ahh - I sense a friendly discussion on the way. I cannot think of any reason
why the ability to self-right should not be a basic requirement of any large
boat designed with the knowledge available to us today. Seems to me that
anyone can design a sharpie. The real design challenge comes in when one
wants it to be self-rescuing. It's a different matter when talking about
small daysailors - (the equivalent there might be to say that it must float
when swamped). We wouldn't want a daysailor which would sink to the bottom.
I love the big sharpies in Parker's Sharpie Book - but would never build one
because they do not come anywhere close to meeting the sharpie design
standards of today.
Mark! I would think those cold alaskan waters would especially make you far
northern guys look for self-rescuing boats - ala the Eskimo rolled kayak!:-)
It is true that most of the publicity about mj being self-righting came from
that Woodenboat article - But I know that I read an article somewhere (which
Mr. Bolger wrote) in which he discussed how and why he had modified the Black
Skimmer in order to come up with a more trailerable Martha Jane. In that
article he said that the black skimmer was self-righting - but only
marginally so - and therefore he increased the freeboard of the MJ to
improve her ability to self-right. ( Does anyone remember where that article
can be found?) The implication - of course was that mj was self-righting.
One thing that I found interesting in Mr. Bolger's analysis of the stability
of the Martha Jane was his realization that simply adding ballast would not
be enough to do the trick - it would also require the addition of the
sponsons or the high house and the sponsons. Also - Increased freeboard was
not enough. The buoyancy of the "seats" was not high enough in relation to
the ballast (a good argument for ballast on the very bottom instead of in the
tanks). This could make one wonder about other supposedly self-righting
designs (the caprice?). The real advantage one now has with the new martha
jane design is that it is now a tested design. It seems to me that the best
designs are the ones which are tested and refined. I think that it is a real
testament to Mr. Bolger that he was willing to refine the design and make it
better. Isn't that what the evolution of a type of boat is all about?
By the way - when I saw the "upgrades" I was very disappointed in the
appearance of the sponsons - but decided to add them anyway. When they are in
place and painted they look good (not just acceptable - but good). I think
that the sponsons and the new rudders make the stern of this boat look much
stronger.
I'm not disappointed.
Your turn.
Steve Anderson
mzeiger@...writes:
<< Sad fact is, gentlemen (and ladies, if you're there) history is full
of boats that were not ideal. The vast majority of them provided
lifetimes of good sailing despite what some have now come to consider
the fatal flaw of not being self-righting >>
Ahh - I sense a friendly discussion on the way. I cannot think of any reason
why the ability to self-right should not be a basic requirement of any large
boat designed with the knowledge available to us today. Seems to me that
anyone can design a sharpie. The real design challenge comes in when one
wants it to be self-rescuing. It's a different matter when talking about
small daysailors - (the equivalent there might be to say that it must float
when swamped). We wouldn't want a daysailor which would sink to the bottom.
I love the big sharpies in Parker's Sharpie Book - but would never build one
because they do not come anywhere close to meeting the sharpie design
standards of today.
Mark! I would think those cold alaskan waters would especially make you far
northern guys look for self-rescuing boats - ala the Eskimo rolled kayak!:-)
It is true that most of the publicity about mj being self-righting came from
that Woodenboat article - But I know that I read an article somewhere (which
Mr. Bolger wrote) in which he discussed how and why he had modified the Black
Skimmer in order to come up with a more trailerable Martha Jane. In that
article he said that the black skimmer was self-righting - but only
marginally so - and therefore he increased the freeboard of the MJ to
improve her ability to self-right. ( Does anyone remember where that article
can be found?) The implication - of course was that mj was self-righting.
One thing that I found interesting in Mr. Bolger's analysis of the stability
of the Martha Jane was his realization that simply adding ballast would not
be enough to do the trick - it would also require the addition of the
sponsons or the high house and the sponsons. Also - Increased freeboard was
not enough. The buoyancy of the "seats" was not high enough in relation to
the ballast (a good argument for ballast on the very bottom instead of in the
tanks). This could make one wonder about other supposedly self-righting
designs (the caprice?). The real advantage one now has with the new martha
jane design is that it is now a tested design. It seems to me that the best
designs are the ones which are tested and refined. I think that it is a real
testament to Mr. Bolger that he was willing to refine the design and make it
better. Isn't that what the evolution of a type of boat is all about?
By the way - when I saw the "upgrades" I was very disappointed in the
appearance of the sponsons - but decided to add them anyway. When they are in
place and painted they look good (not just acceptable - but good). I think
that the sponsons and the new rudders make the stern of this boat look much
stronger.
I'm not disappointed.
Your turn.
Steve Anderson
(Folks, my less-than-reliable Internet provider logged me off while
sending the message below, so I'm sending it again. If it's a repeat,
I apologize.)
I am nearing completion on the Martha Jane as originally designed,
with a few minor modifications. Primarily, I am using lead ballast
instead of water. This decision was made before the questions of MJs
abilities or seaworthiness, and involved wanting to use the tank space
for food and gear storage.
No disrespect to those who have had unpleasant experiences with their
MJs, but I think a lot of people (and I fear the majority of these
were armchair sailors) took a quote from a _Woodenboat_ article too
far, and to heart. The article said "The MJ should be selfrighting . .
." meaning the author thought it would be selfrighting in most
situations. I think this led to the idea that it WAS selfrighting, and
when it turned out not to be in some situations (although there are
many cases where MJs have come right back up after knock downs) people
became concerned.
I think that the original design of the MJ is one of Mr. Bolger's most
enduring designs because it offers a lot of features that make it a
fine boat. If you like it, build it and sail it, and disregard the
opinions of this list. What we do here is fun, but no one should live
their life by committee.
Sad fact is, gentlemen (and ladies, if you're there) history is full
of boats that were not ideal. The vast majority of them provided
lifetimes of good sailing despite what some have now come to consider
the fatal flaw of not being selfrighting. Many designs proved to be
downright dangerous, yet people still sail them, and come safely home.
I would assert that risk is an unescapable part of any worthwhile
recreation. Sailing's not as safe as golf, but it's probably safer
than skydiving.
If you hear someday that I flipped my MJ and drowned, you can still
quote me on this. The water isn't for the faint of heart. If you spend
all your time trying not to die, you're not really living. If you have
to have absolute safety, stay on shore. But watch out for cars,
falling trees, disgruntled employees . . . you get the picture.
Now go build the boat of your dreams, and don't make me come back in
here!
Mark Zeiger
Juneau, Alaska
sending the message below, so I'm sending it again. If it's a repeat,
I apologize.)
I am nearing completion on the Martha Jane as originally designed,
with a few minor modifications. Primarily, I am using lead ballast
instead of water. This decision was made before the questions of MJs
abilities or seaworthiness, and involved wanting to use the tank space
for food and gear storage.
No disrespect to those who have had unpleasant experiences with their
MJs, but I think a lot of people (and I fear the majority of these
were armchair sailors) took a quote from a _Woodenboat_ article too
far, and to heart. The article said "The MJ should be selfrighting . .
." meaning the author thought it would be selfrighting in most
situations. I think this led to the idea that it WAS selfrighting, and
when it turned out not to be in some situations (although there are
many cases where MJs have come right back up after knock downs) people
became concerned.
I think that the original design of the MJ is one of Mr. Bolger's most
enduring designs because it offers a lot of features that make it a
fine boat. If you like it, build it and sail it, and disregard the
opinions of this list. What we do here is fun, but no one should live
their life by committee.
Sad fact is, gentlemen (and ladies, if you're there) history is full
of boats that were not ideal. The vast majority of them provided
lifetimes of good sailing despite what some have now come to consider
the fatal flaw of not being selfrighting. Many designs proved to be
downright dangerous, yet people still sail them, and come safely home.
I would assert that risk is an unescapable part of any worthwhile
recreation. Sailing's not as safe as golf, but it's probably safer
than skydiving.
If you hear someday that I flipped my MJ and drowned, you can still
quote me on this. The water isn't for the faint of heart. If you spend
all your time trying not to die, you're not really living. If you have
to have absolute safety, stay on shore. But watch out for cars,
falling trees, disgruntled employees . . . you get the picture.
Now go build the boat of your dreams, and don't make me come back in
here!
Mark Zeiger
Juneau, Alaska