Re: [bolger] Re: Gypsy

On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 4:16 AM, graeme19121984<graeme19121984@...>wrote:

who00Owee, Mark your eyes are good! I'm a bit uncertain, could be... How's your nose?

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Mark Albanese <marka97203@...> wrote:
>
> > Hah! Is that boat right behind the Dobler the back half of
> > someone's unheralded, Flat-Bottom Outboard Cruiser, SBJ Cartoon #9?
>
> > Nels,
> >
> > I was earlier today looking at Joe Dobler's Nootka Sound camp-
> > cruising doryhttp://www.duckworksbbs.com/plans/dobler/nootka/
> > index.htm
>

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "wcneal2002" <wcneal2002@...> wrote:

> Graeme,
> I love my Dovekie dearly, and I've rowed it 80 miles in a week, which to me makes it a really remarkable sail-and-oar (and camp!) boat. But the need for a forward centerboard to go up and down for tacking and heading upwind is certainly an exception to your observation.
>
> Bill
>

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "prairiedog2332" <arvent@...> wrote:
>
> Graeme,
>
> What a great reminder reading that again! I had forgotten about the motor option, but I probably would not bother if I knew how to row with any skill:-)
>
> I must say I am a bit biased as to trying arrange things to sleep in hull this size, based on years of canoeing. There are so many nice little weather and bug proof tents out there with the added advantage that you can place them on small solid footprint above the bug line near shore. Mine sets up in about 5 minutes and returns to it's storage bag in the same time. Sleeps two cozily.
>
> Also of course, it allows for a campfire usually, where I do my boating. I also have a lean-to shelter tarp that is easy to set-up if it is raining or threatening to. (Here we have to raise our food pack up into a tree limb because of bears.) But that is only a personal choice that works for me.
>
> Anchoring a bit off-shore is the other option - which is where the Birdwatcher designs are a great option. I really love the Camper 640 for that reason. It can even be rowed under cover.
>
> Nels
>

>
> On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 10:43 AM, graeme19121984 <
> graeme19121984@...> wrote:
>
> >
> > Lately I've been struck with how on even the most basic of boats PCB gets
> > the obvious forces, and no doubt the more academic, to all align. It's quite
> > remarkable. And, I bet fiddling with cheapness and minimal material
> > consumption didn't make it any easier! Such deceptive simplicity. Wonderful.
> >
>
> Graeme,
>
> You nailed it. You've stated the heart of who Phil Bolger was as a designer
> and a person. He was the master of parsimony, with an elegant "deceptive
> simplicity."
>
> fred s.
>

On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 10:43 AM, graeme19121984<graeme19121984@...>wrote:

Lately I've been struck with how on even the most basic of boats PCB gets the obvious forces, and no doubt the more academic, to all align. It's quite remarkable. And, I bet fiddling with cheapness and minimal material consumption didn't make it any easier! Such deceptive simplicity. Wonderful.

Graeme,

You nailed it. You've stated the heart of who Phil Bolger was as a designer and a person. He was the master of parsimony, with an elegant "deceptive simplicity."

fred s.

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "graeme19121984" <graeme19121984@...> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bolger/files/Gypsy/
>
> Well, PCB told and showed Dan as how it was a multipurpose Galley II after the likes of T Galley which has a sleep spot. Dynamite shows the motorboard and specifies 2 - 5HP. TG didn't start out as motor/row/sail either. My take is that it surprised PCB when it emerged that TG was fully 3-way capable, and that in the Laser era around 15 years later he had done it again instantly with a more conventional looking hull. Neither Phil nor Dynamite motored their respective TGs.
>
> I think I can recall Reuel Parker suggesting a cot-like bed of canvas under a boom tent and slung from the gunnels along the sides so that crew slept above the floor and avoided the large space restricting obstacle of the sharpie centreboard etc. Yep - Sharpie Book, pp 78 & 108.
>
> Graeme
>
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "prairiedog2332" <arvent@> wrote:
> >
> > Tiny old photo of Dan at Dynamite's website.
> >
> >http://www.instantboats.com/gypsy.htm
> >
> > I don't believe Gypsy was ever thought by Bolger as a hull one could
> > sleep in, unlike Cartopper with it's elegantly designed tent addition.
> > Nor do I think it was thought of as being capable of using it with a
> > motor. Dynamite already knew it was a great rower, so maybe that is what
> > he intended as being multipurpose?
> >
> > Mr. Bolger was often less than enthused about adding a sail plan to a
> > good row boat. You can read what he has to say regarding Spur II on page
> > 51 of BWAOM. Yet this leeboard/thwart design is one of the best I have
> > ever seen, for strength and simplicity.
> >
> > "The sectional shape of the boat precludes use of conventional
> > leeboards, and there is not depth enough under the seats for a
> > centerboard."
> >
> > Maybe another reason for the slanted dagger board on Gypsy - to clear
> > the rowing thwart? Then it has to be off-set to clear the mast!
> >
> > There was another article in SBJ about a fellow and his Gypsy rowing
> > along the Meuse River, and I believe camping ashore or staying at a
> > marina or inn. Reminded me of his being in England when I read it. I
> > think Bolger mentioned how he enjoyed that article.
> >
> > I think it would be hard to improve on the design and would be perfect
> > on quiet rivers and lakes with enough fetch to sail at times. Just carry
> > you regular backpacking gear.
> >
> > Nels
> >
> >
> > --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "graeme19121984" <graeme19121984@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Nels,
> > >
> > >
> > > I dug out the scan of that old SBJ article by Dan Segal (may stick it
> > in Files later - lifted from other Files somewhere). You know, the piece
> > where at the end he describes Dynamite on the shore watching, never
> > having seen a sailboat plane before, and so excitedly jumping up and
> > down and being "pleased as a well fed dog" (lovely turn of phrase) at
> > how Gypsy handled the 25kt gusts and chop that day. But more to the
> > point when Dan got back in, and said it was a fine sailboat, Dynamite
> > responded "Not bad for a multipurpose boat" - a fact Dan had forgotten
> > owing to his exhilarating try out under sail. At the start of the
> > article Dan tells how Gypsy was to be a more commonly acceptable looking
> > boat than Thomaston Galley, but to have the TG capabilities. The new
> > drawings PCB showed him had the boat named Galley II - row, sail, power,
> > like TG! I don't recall seeing a pic of any Gypsy with an outboard, and
> > only Jon's recent stretched version with any provision for one if
> > desired. Dynamite barely mentions motoring. Well, if she was meant to do
> > what TG did, I wonder, surely cruising and sleeping aboard were part of
> > it. I wonder if any of those Gypsy II drawings showed an offset board,
> > or even a leeboard?
> > >
> > >
> > > Nels, the Gypsy daggerboard is markedly inclined. I don't think that's
> > to necessarily delay stalling ;) but think it mostly to shed all the
> > stuff that would catch on it in those down east local shallow waters,
> > and one way to have a tall daggerboard case clear the spot where a rower
> > must sit. The mast is already raked aft to place the sail CSA above the
> > hull CoB. The board is shaped so that its effective CLR is under the CoB
> > at about a third the way in from the tip when the boat is heeled as it
> > is meant to under press of sail. (Who knows when moving where the actual
> > sail CoE or board CLR might actually be?) Depending on which part of the
> > inclined daggerboard or case you measure from you could have a verticle
> > board still align on the centres and be up to 2.5ft further aft! The
> > centres mentioned are only about 0.5ft forward of the widest hull
> > dimension at station 9. Slightly tapered spacers could align a board
> > there. A signature rope-slung Bolger leeboard would need spacer/guards
> > projecting further forward and outwards, which may not look so good but
> > which could still function. A foot wide verticle board centred right on
> > station 9 might require another 5 degrees or so of mast rake, or perhaps
> > just rake the board forward slightly when on the wind?
> > >
> > >
> > > There's room to play, however I'm inclined towards just moving the
> > designed board off to one side. Oars would have to be stored differently
> > in a cruiser anyway wouldn't they? The steep bilge panels, and possibly
> > side decks/flotation don't allow much more width than the bottom
> > provides to sleep on. Side decks are probably required to make up for
> > the strength of the removed frame at station 9. Or leave the frame and
> > put a cockpit floor in between stations 6 and 12 at the height of the
> > designed benches and thwart - a footwell with a removable cover would
> > take care of a rower's legs and allow anyone taller than 6ft the ability
> > to straighten theirs when asleep diagonally across the cockpit.
> > >
> > >
> > > Unlike the CSA you don't always see centre of bouyancy marked on PCB's
> > plans, yet you can bet it was calculated. Likewise for CLR - perhaps
> > because of dynamic lead in the keel CLR, but the profile seems to always
> > look as though the hull CLR is aligned with the sail CSA. I recall
> > reading an edition of Slocum's Spray that had a number of appendices.
> > One of those was a detailed NA analysis of multidudinous forces at work
> > in Spray under way, and how those all amazingly passed through the same
> > point - which is why she was such a sweet hands-off sailer. Lately I've
> > been struck with how on even the most basic of boats PCB gets the
> > obvious forces, and no doubt the more academic, to all align. It's quite
> > remarkable. And, I bet fiddling with cheapness and minimal material
> > consumption didn't make it any easier! Such deceptive simplicity.
> > Wonderful.
> > >
> > >
> > > Graeme
> > >
> > >
> > > --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "prairiedog2332" arvent@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Dan Segal from SBJ put the Gypsy prototype through it's sailing
> > paces
> > > > and was really impressed.I think if you tried leeboards instead of
> > the
> > > > daggerboard, performance would suffer because they would have to be
> > > > installed further aft to be located parallel to the water flow of
> > the
> > > > hull which seems to be a prerequisite. Then of course you would have
> > to
> > > > relocate the sail rig further aft as well and everything goes out of
> > > > whack balance-wise.
> > > >
> > > > Would be easy to try Bruce's suggestion and compare results as this
> > is a
> > > > common practice in canoe and kayak sailing adaptations.
> > > >
> > > > I would expect that if leeboards worked then Mr. Bolger would have
> > gone
> > > > with them.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > <http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/YPeYSwdZ41TTtMbonoe1J83C8exi1qxkjpxfFJgZa2\
> > \
> > > >
> > XS5I1gXzMeB-4J5hllXxB-tM1772cSACYUHEa68RJd4SZul46-yQ/Gypsy%20Daysailer/g\
> > \
> > > > ypsyst.gif>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "graeme19121984" <graeme19121984@>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I wonder if without any such arbitrary exclusion perhaps there is
> > an
> > > > acceptable Gypsy leeboard option?
> > > > >
> > > > > Is the Gypsy upper strake wide enough... would the force couple
> > > > resulting from the leeboard bearing on it be too great (it's about
> > 7"
> > > > wide in way of any leeboard - the Thomaston Galley topside strake is
> > > > about 8")? Side decking to help here? But then what about the clip?
> > > > Would the force be too much for a rope slung or a pinned, pivoting
> > board
> > > > itself?
> > > > >
> > > > > G
> > > > >
> > > > > --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Peter" pvanderwaart@ wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Has he moved the daggerboard sideways any to clear out a sleep
> > > > spot?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I believe that in the original Gypsy, the daggerboard is
> > off-center.
> > > > If it was on the centerline, you would not be able to raise/remove
> > the
> > > > board with the mast in place.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "prairiedog2332" <arvent@...> wrote:
>
> Tiny old photo of Dan at Dynamite's website.
>
>http://www.instantboats.com/gypsy.htm
>
> I don't believe Gypsy was ever thought by Bolger as a hull one could
> sleep in, unlike Cartopper with it's elegantly designed tent addition.
> Nor do I think it was thought of as being capable of using it with a
> motor. Dynamite already knew it was a great rower, so maybe that is what
> he intended as being multipurpose?
>
> Mr. Bolger was often less than enthused about adding a sail plan to a
> good row boat. You can read what he has to say regarding Spur II on page
> 51 of BWAOM. Yet this leeboard/thwart design is one of the best I have
> ever seen, for strength and simplicity.
>
> "The sectional shape of the boat precludes use of conventional
> leeboards, and there is not depth enough under the seats for a
> centerboard."
>
> Maybe another reason for the slanted dagger board on Gypsy - to clear
> the rowing thwart? Then it has to be off-set to clear the mast!
>
> There was another article in SBJ about a fellow and his Gypsy rowing
> along the Meuse River, and I believe camping ashore or staying at a
> marina or inn. Reminded me of his being in England when I read it. I
> think Bolger mentioned how he enjoyed that article.
>
> I think it would be hard to improve on the design and would be perfect
> on quiet rivers and lakes with enough fetch to sail at times. Just carry
> you regular backpacking gear.
>
> Nels
>
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "graeme19121984" <graeme19121984@>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Nels,
> >
> >
> > I dug out the scan of that old SBJ article by Dan Segal (may stick it
> in Files later - lifted from other Files somewhere). You know, the piece
> where at the end he describes Dynamite on the shore watching, never
> having seen a sailboat plane before, and so excitedly jumping up and
> down and being "pleased as a well fed dog" (lovely turn of phrase) at
> how Gypsy handled the 25kt gusts and chop that day. But more to the
> point when Dan got back in, and said it was a fine sailboat, Dynamite
> responded "Not bad for a multipurpose boat" - a fact Dan had forgotten
> owing to his exhilarating try out under sail. At the start of the
> article Dan tells how Gypsy was to be a more commonly acceptable looking
> boat than Thomaston Galley, but to have the TG capabilities. The new
> drawings PCB showed him had the boat named Galley II - row, sail, power,
> like TG! I don't recall seeing a pic of any Gypsy with an outboard, and
> only Jon's recent stretched version with any provision for one if
> desired. Dynamite barely mentions motoring. Well, if she was meant to do
> what TG did, I wonder, surely cruising and sleeping aboard were part of
> it. I wonder if any of those Gypsy II drawings showed an offset board,
> or even a leeboard?
> >
> >
> > Nels, the Gypsy daggerboard is markedly inclined. I don't think that's
> to necessarily delay stalling ;) but think it mostly to shed all the
> stuff that would catch on it in those down east local shallow waters,
> and one way to have a tall daggerboard case clear the spot where a rower
> must sit. The mast is already raked aft to place the sail CSA above the
> hull CoB. The board is shaped so that its effective CLR is under the CoB
> at about a third the way in from the tip when the boat is heeled as it
> is meant to under press of sail. (Who knows when moving where the actual
> sail CoE or board CLR might actually be?) Depending on which part of the
> inclined daggerboard or case you measure from you could have a verticle
> board still align on the centres and be up to 2.5ft further aft! The
> centres mentioned are only about 0.5ft forward of the widest hull
> dimension at station 9. Slightly tapered spacers could align a board
> there. A signature rope-slung Bolger leeboard would need spacer/guards
> projecting further forward and outwards, which may not look so good but
> which could still function. A foot wide verticle board centred right on
> station 9 might require another 5 degrees or so of mast rake, or perhaps
> just rake the board forward slightly when on the wind?
> >
> >
> > There's room to play, however I'm inclined towards just moving the
> designed board off to one side. Oars would have to be stored differently
> in a cruiser anyway wouldn't they? The steep bilge panels, and possibly
> side decks/flotation don't allow much more width than the bottom
> provides to sleep on. Side decks are probably required to make up for
> the strength of the removed frame at station 9. Or leave the frame and
> put a cockpit floor in between stations 6 and 12 at the height of the
> designed benches and thwart - a footwell with a removable cover would
> take care of a rower's legs and allow anyone taller than 6ft the ability
> to straighten theirs when asleep diagonally across the cockpit.
> >
> >
> > Unlike the CSA you don't always see centre of bouyancy marked on PCB's
> plans, yet you can bet it was calculated. Likewise for CLR - perhaps
> because of dynamic lead in the keel CLR, but the profile seems to always
> look as though the hull CLR is aligned with the sail CSA. I recall
> reading an edition of Slocum's Spray that had a number of appendices.
> One of those was a detailed NA analysis of multidudinous forces at work
> in Spray under way, and how those all amazingly passed through the same
> point - which is why she was such a sweet hands-off sailer. Lately I've
> been struck with how on even the most basic of boats PCB gets the
> obvious forces, and no doubt the more academic, to all align. It's quite
> remarkable. And, I bet fiddling with cheapness and minimal material
> consumption didn't make it any easier! Such deceptive simplicity.
> Wonderful.
> >
> >
> > Graeme
> >
> >
> > --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "prairiedog2332" arvent@ wrote:
> > >
> > > Dan Segal from SBJ put the Gypsy prototype through it's sailing
> paces
> > > and was really impressed.I think if you tried leeboards instead of
> the
> > > daggerboard, performance would suffer because they would have to be
> > > installed further aft to be located parallel to the water flow of
> the
> > > hull which seems to be a prerequisite. Then of course you would have
> to
> > > relocate the sail rig further aft as well and everything goes out of
> > > whack balance-wise.
> > >
> > > Would be easy to try Bruce's suggestion and compare results as this
> is a
> > > common practice in canoe and kayak sailing adaptations.
> > >
> > > I would expect that if leeboards worked then Mr. Bolger would have
> gone
> > > with them.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> <http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/YPeYSwdZ41TTtMbonoe1J83C8exi1qxkjpxfFJgZa2\
> \
> > >
> XS5I1gXzMeB-4J5hllXxB-tM1772cSACYUHEa68RJd4SZul46-yQ/Gypsy%20Daysailer/g\
> \
> > > ypsyst.gif>
> > >
> > >
> > > --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "graeme19121984" <graeme19121984@>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I wonder if without any such arbitrary exclusion perhaps there is
> an
> > > acceptable Gypsy leeboard option?
> > > >
> > > > Is the Gypsy upper strake wide enough... would the force couple
> > > resulting from the leeboard bearing on it be too great (it's about
> 7"
> > > wide in way of any leeboard - the Thomaston Galley topside strake is
> > > about 8")? Side decking to help here? But then what about the clip?
> > > Would the force be too much for a rope slung or a pinned, pivoting
> board
> > > itself?
> > > >
> > > > G
> > > >
> > > > --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Peter" pvanderwaart@ wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Has he moved the daggerboard sideways any to clear out a sleep
> > > spot?
> > > > >
> > > > > I believe that in the original Gypsy, the daggerboard is
> off-center.
> > > If it was on the centerline, you would not be able to raise/remove
> the
> > > board with the mast in place.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

>
>
>
> Nels,
>
>
> I dug out the scan of that old SBJ article by Dan Segal (may stick it

>
>
> Nels, the Gypsy daggerboard is markedly inclined. I don't think that's

>
>
> There's room to play, however I'm inclined towards just moving the

>
>
> Unlike the CSA you don't always see centre of bouyancy marked on PCB's

>
>
> Graeme
>
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "prairiedog2332" arvent@ wrote:
> >
> > Dan Segal from SBJ put the Gypsy prototype through it's sailing

> > and was really impressed.I think if you tried leeboards instead of

> > daggerboard, performance would suffer because they would have to be
> > installed further aft to be located parallel to the water flow of

> > hull which seems to be a prerequisite. Then of course you would have

> > relocate the sail rig further aft as well and everything goes out of
> > whack balance-wise.
> >
> > Would be easy to try Bruce's suggestion and compare results as this

> > common practice in canoe and kayak sailing adaptations.
> >
> > I would expect that if leeboards worked then Mr. Bolger would have

> > with them.
> >
> >
> >

> >

> > ypsyst.gif>
> >
> >
> > --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "graeme19121984" <graeme19121984@>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I wonder if without any such arbitrary exclusion perhaps there is

> > acceptable Gypsy leeboard option?
> > >
> > > Is the Gypsy upper strake wide enough... would the force couple
> > resulting from the leeboard bearing on it be too great (it's about

> > wide in way of any leeboard - the Thomaston Galley topside strake is
> > about 8")? Side decking to help here? But then what about the clip?
> > Would the force be too much for a rope slung or a pinned, pivoting

> > itself?
> > >
> > > G
> > >
> > > --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Peter" pvanderwaart@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Has he moved the daggerboard sideways any to clear out a sleep
> > spot?
> > > >
> > > > I believe that in the original Gypsy, the daggerboard is

> > If it was on the centerline, you would not be able to raise/remove

> > board with the mast in place.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "prairiedog2332" <arvent@...> wrote:
>
> Dan Segal from SBJ put the Gypsy prototype through it's sailing paces
> and was really impressed.I think if you tried leeboards instead of the
> daggerboard, performance would suffer because they would have to be
> installed further aft to be located parallel to the water flow of the
> hull which seems to be a prerequisite. Then of course you would have to
> relocate the sail rig further aft as well and everything goes out of
> whack balance-wise.
>
> Would be easy to try Bruce's suggestion and compare results as this is a
> common practice in canoe and kayak sailing adaptations.
>
> I would expect that if leeboards worked then Mr. Bolger would have gone
> with them.
>
>
> <http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/YPeYSwdZ41TTtMbonoe1J83C8exi1qxkjpxfFJgZa2\
> XS5I1gXzMeB-4J5hllXxB-tM1772cSACYUHEa68RJd4SZul46-yQ/Gypsy%20Daysailer/g\
> ypsyst.gif>
>
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "graeme19121984" <graeme19121984@>
> wrote:
>
> > I wonder if without any such arbitrary exclusion perhaps there is an
> acceptable Gypsy leeboard option?
> >
> > Is the Gypsy upper strake wide enough... would the force couple
> resulting from the leeboard bearing on it be too great (it's about 7"
> wide in way of any leeboard - the Thomaston Galley topside strake is
> about 8")? Side decking to help here? But then what about the clip?
> Would the force be too much for a rope slung or a pinned, pivoting board
> itself?
> >
> > G
> >
> > --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Peter" pvanderwaart@ wrote:
> > >
> > > > Has he moved the daggerboard sideways any to clear out a sleep
> spot?
> > >
> > > I believe that in the original Gypsy, the daggerboard is off-center.
> If it was on the centerline, you would not be able to raise/remove the
> board with the mast in place.
> > >
> >
>

On 3/11/2010 10:21 AM, adventures_in_astrophotography wrote:

Hi Fred,

What about a 1/3 scale up of Cartopper? It has much the same shape as Gypsy
but a centerboard placed farther forward combined with a deep  rudder. That
would make a nice raid boat and could sleep two.

A 1/3 scale up of cartopper would make a pretty hefty 15-footer that would be hard to car top, being almost 6' in beam.

My experience with the 1.25 stretch-only version of Gypsy has been very positive.  It's carried the dog, me, and a big load of camping gear that put us well over the design waterline without any trouble.  Last fall, I rowed it 9 miles in that condition, half of it in gusty winds.  However, the stretch-only scaling flattens the rocker some, and it would be a little better boat in choppy water with slightly more rocker and depth of hull, I think.  The low sheer is a blessing in high winds, though.

I have often thought that Gypsy or a derivative like mine could use the forward centerboard, big rudder geometry of Cartopper, just like Phil said he considered before coming up with Cartoon 40.  Recall that he didn't say it wouldn't work, just that he didn't think it would be the best setup for a spirited, quick maneuvering daysailer.  For a camp/beach/expedition cruiser, I think it would work pretty good.  I almost did this on my version, but opted to go rowing instead of experimenting with the sailing rig.

Two years ago, I lofted (at quarter scale) a version of Cartopper that was scaled up 1.25 in beam and depth and 2.0 in length.  The idea was to get an expedition boat for two + dog for a week or more, with a simple sailing rig and two sliding seats for rowing.  It was supposed to use a forward centerboard just like the original, but I wanted a dipping lug to get shorter mast.  It would have made a good raid boat, too.  The result was acceptable for the requirements, but the sheer didn't look quite right at those proportions.  As usual, I starting getting carried away with complicated dry storage compartments, alternatives to the forward centerboard, and too-clever arrangements for various items.  At that point I lost interest and built my Gypsy variant.  Nevertheless, I'd still like to design and build a boat to these requirements one day.

Jon Kolbwww.kolbsadventures.com

> What about a 1/3 scale up of Cartopper? It has much the same shape as Gypsy
> but a centerboard placed farther forward combined with a deep rudder. That
> would make a nice raid boat and could sleep two.

> I wonder if without any such arbitrary exclusion perhaps there is an

>
> Is the Gypsy upper strake wide enough... would the force couple

>
> G
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Peter" pvanderwaart@ wrote:
> >
> > > Has he moved the daggerboard sideways any to clear out a sleep

> >
> > I believe that in the original Gypsy, the daggerboard is off-center.

> >
>

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 12:18 AM, graeme19121984<graeme19121984@...>wrote:

Well Fred,

there's already a sleep spot in Cartopper. Is she too small to be a good row/sail campcruiser proposition? She gets along at hull speed very easily under sail or oar. Is that enough speed? Is there enough storage? She may handle the rough stuff better than Gypsy - I don't know. Regarding the last: how does Gypsy go against a light dory under oars in open water?

Graeme

There's room in Cartopper for one adult to sleep.  Phil mentions that taking two persons in Cartopper is problematic when rowing. There isn't a good place for the second person for good balance. Somebody here in Minnesota built a stretched Cartopper just for rowing, and that would solve the second person position problem. A Cartopper scaled up in all dimensions by 1/3 would have room for two to sleep and have more than twice the displacement, thus be able to carry more gear. Gypsy would be leaner and faster, as you noted.

I've been kicking around the Cartopper idea for quite a while. My younger son and his fiancee live next to the Connecticut River in Western Massachussetts, where she's in grad school at Amherst and he's working on his dissertation. They like to camp and canoe, and she's a serious rower, having been the coxswain on the national championship University of Minnesota 8-oar shell a few years ago. So I've wanted to build them a rowing boat. The obvious choice for rowing would be the Long Dory, but it wouldn't be a good choice for camping, and it's so long, it couldn't be cartopped and would be difficult to store. Cartopper is a bit too small, but if made a bit larger, it would work. Maybe a 25% scale up would optimal, retaining portability but providing comfortable room for two skinny people.

fred s.

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Fred Schumacher <fredschum@...> wrote:

> What about a 1/3 scale up of Cartopper? It has much the same shape as Gypsy
> but a centerboard placed farther forward combined with a deep rudder. That
> would make a nice raid boat and could sleep two.
>
> fred s.
>

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Hallman <hallman@...> wrote:
>
> Also, take a look at the round bottom Spur II, which has a leeboard in
> its design if I recall correctly. As is classically PCB, (thinking
> outside the box), he uses a 90 degree cross plank connected to the
> vertical leeboard to address the rounded sided hull problem.
>

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "graeme19121984" <graeme19121984@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> The Gypsy bottom strake L/B is over the 'magic' S/L rule cheating 6 in approximating 6.9, contrasting to that of fat Cartopper at 5.2...

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "prairiedog2332" <arvent@...> wrote:
>
> It may be useful to review what Mr. Bolger had to say about leeboards,
> bilgeboards and bilge keels in BWAOM. Check the index for referring
> comments. For example he says why leeboards won't work on a Cartopper
> which has a similar hull-form to Gypsy.
>
> He also mentions why leeboards don't work all that well on a
> Birdwatcher-type hull, unless a bow dagger-board is added. Mentioned in
> the Whalewatcher write-up. And the Scow Schooner write-up.
>
> Nels

>
>
>
> It's true the board is off-centre, but only enough, as you say, to

>
> I recall the SBJ article concerning a moored/decked/rain-shedding

>
> I wonder if without any such arbitrary exclusion perhaps there is an

>
> Is the Gypsy upper strake wide enough... would the force couple

>
> G
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Peter" pvanderwaart@ wrote:
> >
> > > Has he moved the daggerboard sideways any to clear out a sleep

> >
> > I believe that in the original Gypsy, the daggerboard is off-center.

> >
>

On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:05 AM, graeme19121984<graeme19121984@...>wrote:

It's true the board is off-centre, but only enough, as you say, to clear the mast. If it were way off to the side then I believe there just might be enough room for a sleep spot if the thwart is also removed.

What about a 1/3 scale up of Cartopper? It has much the same shape as Gypsy but a centerboard placed farther forward combined with a deep  rudder. That would make a nice raid boat and could sleep two.

fred s.

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "graeme19121984" <graeme19121984@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> It's true the board is off-centre, but only enough, as you say, to clear the mast. If it were way off to the side then I believe there just might be enough room for a sleep spot if the thwart is also removed.
>
> I recall the SBJ article concerning a moored/decked/rain-shedding Gypsy modification request specifically excluding leeboards. Phil wrestled with twin bilge-daggerboards, and all sorts, but gave it away and went for the v-bottomed centreboard Cartoon 40 as a casual day-sailer solution for his correspondent's needs.
>
> I wonder if without any such arbitrary exclusion perhaps there is an acceptable Gypsy leeboard option?
>
> Is the Gypsy upper strake wide enough... would the force couple resulting from the leeboard bearing on it be too great (it's about 7" wide in way of any leeboard - the Thomaston Galley topside strake is about 8")? Side decking to help here? But then what about the clip? Would the force be too much for a rope slung or a pinned, pivoting board itself?
>
> G
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Peter" <pvanderwaart@> wrote:
> >
> > > Has he moved the daggerboard sideways any to clear out a sleep spot?
> >
> > I believe that in the original Gypsy, the daggerboard is off-center. If it was on the centerline, you would not be able to raise/remove the board with the mast in place.
> >
>

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Peter" <pvanderwaart@...> wrote:
>
> > Has he moved the daggerboard sideways any to clear out a sleep spot?
>
> I believe that in the original Gypsy, the daggerboard is off-center. If it was on the centerline, you would not be able to raise/remove the board with the mast in place.
>

> Has he moved the daggerboard sideways any to clear out a sleep spot?

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "roger99a" <roger99a@...> wrote:
>
> I built a Gypsy last summer. You can see it at
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bolger2/files/Arkansas%20Gypsy/
> It's made mostly of lauan, which is lighter than pine ply, and "B"
> grade spruce, which is light as well. I have never tried
cartopping
> it, but I don't think I would want to. It's pretty heavy, and if I
> had to go through all that to go sailing I probably wouldn't. I
> lucked up and found an old trailer in my neighbor's back fence row
> and used it. Most any utility trailer could be modified to
> accomodate such a narrow boat.
> I did deck mine, and I've seen quite a bit of water flow over the
> deck and back into the lake where it belongs. The daggerboard trunk
> seems pretty beefy to me, but I have yet to slam it into something
> with full speed and crew weight. I usually use it with 425lbs of
> crew and some gear, but not enough gear to camp with.
> The little boat seems fast and can be exciting, which is important
> to me. I like hanging off the rail, myself. I would avoid rough
> water, though, just because she has so little freeboard. I wonder
> if it would hurt her to raise the side 2 or 3 inches?
>
> Roger S
>
> --- In bolger@y..., "prthober" <prthober@y...> wrote:
> > Hello fellow Bolgerphiles.
> >
> > I recently moved to Portland, ME and am about to realize my long-
> held
> > dream of building and sailing my own boat. I have owned a set of
> > plans for Gypsy for about ten years and have always been able to
> come
> > up with an excuse for not building one. Now is the time for
> action. I
> > come seeking advice and opinions.
> >
> > Is this the right boat? I want to use it to sail/row in Casco Bay
> > (inside the islands) and also cartop it to lakes here in Maine.
> Two
> > adults maximum. Maybe camp with it on the lakes, carrying the
> > equivelant of backpacking gear.
> >
> > I plan to build it without modification of ACX, lumberyard #2
> pine,
> > and epoxy. I am not going to make it a yacht - just sound and
> > durable. I am an experienced furniture designer and builder. I am
> > unemployed and will work full time (or more) to construct it.
> Should
> > I be able to complete it in a month?
> >
> > Is this a practical boat for cartopping? Anyone have an accurate
> > weight for this boat?
> >
> > Would decking it fore and aft be advisable or just add weight
> without
> > any benefit?
> >
> > I have some misgivings of the daggerboard. Is grounding likely to
> > damage the trunk? If so is there simple prevention other than
> being
> > careful where I sail?
> >
> > Paul Thober
>

> Has anyone in here built this boat? And is it a good first timer boat
> to build?

> I added some photo's of the Gypsy model I built.
>
>http://www.tcinternet.net/users/bjschwa/gypsy.htm
>
> Brent

--- In bolger@y..., "XROMAD" <xromad@y...> wrote:
> I added some photo's of the Gypsy model I built.
>
>http://www.tcinternet.net/users/bjschwa/gypsy.htm
>
> Brent

--- In bolger@y..., "XROMAD" <xromad@y...> wrote:
> > I have some pictures that I will publish to the web
> > tonight or tomorrow and will post the url.
>
> Here's the link. Nothing fancy just my thoughts and some photos.
>
>http://www.tcinternet.net/users/bjschwa/gypsy.htm
>
> Brent

> I have some pictures that I will publish to the web
> tonight or tomorrow and will post the url.

--- In bolger@y..., "Peter Lenihan" <ellengaest@b...> wrote:
> Brent,
> Any chance for the rest of us to get a peek at this apparent
> rocket machine you have?!?!Nothing fancy,mind you,just a few colour
> shots of her doing her stuff out on the water,and maybe a few close
> up for the details,and also a nice review of your experience
sailing
> past the fleet?
> There is lots of photo room over on Bolger2 and Bolger3 to
> entertain us with :-)
> Sincerely,
> Peter Lenihan,with early pangs of winteritis already setting in
just
> bellow the cerebral cortex,along the shores of the
St.Lawrence........> >

--- In bolger@y..., "XROMAD" <xromad@y...> wrote:
> Thanks Bill,
>
> For that nice plug, you can have a free ride and a free
> breakfast in the spring. Watch for soft water and bring
> warm cloths.
>
> One small detail, the sail is white polytarp.
>
> I thought about Tyvek. But, decided to leave the other
> boats SOME dignity as I blow by them....<Big Grin>
>
> Brent
>
>

--- In bolger@y..., "wmrpage" <wmrpage@a...> wrote:
> A MN-based Bolgerista gave me a tour of his "Gypsy" this weekend.
> WOW!!! I'd seen the plans in Payson's book, but they didn't make
> anything like the impression seeing it in 3-D did. Such a TALL mast
> on such a NARROW bottom! It boggled my mind!
>
> He said that stepping the mast single-handed is no problem. He made
> his own sails out of a Tyvek kit. He says he can at least keep pace
> with any other boats he runs across on the lake where he sails. I
> don't doubt him on that score - the boat looks like a hot boat. He
> mentioned the possibility of altering the rig to hang a jib on it. I
> was too tongue-tied to say what was on my mind: "Hang a jib? Are you
> nuts?! I want to know how to REEF it!"
>
> A very interesting boat. I'm going to try to cadge a ride sometime
> next year when our water softens again.
>
> Ciao for Niao,
> Bill in MN

--- In bolger@y..., "prthober" <prthober@y...> wrote:
> Hello fellow Bolgerphiles.
>
> I recently moved to Portland, ME and am about to realize my long-
held
> dream of building and sailing my own boat. I have owned a set of
> plans for Gypsy for about ten years and have always been able to
come
> up with an excuse for not building one. Now is the time for
action. I
> come seeking advice and opinions.
>
> Is this the right boat? I want to use it to sail/row in Casco Bay
> (inside the islands) and also cartop it to lakes here in Maine.
Two
> adults maximum. Maybe camp with it on the lakes, carrying the
> equivelant of backpacking gear.
>
> I plan to build it without modification of ACX, lumberyard #2
pine,
> and epoxy. I am not going to make it a yacht - just sound and
> durable. I am an experienced furniture designer and builder. I am
> unemployed and will work full time (or more) to construct it.
Should
> I be able to complete it in a month?
>
> Is this a practical boat for cartopping? Anyone have an accurate
> weight for this boat?
>
> Would decking it fore and aft be advisable or just add weight
without
> any benefit?
>
> I have some misgivings of the daggerboard. Is grounding likely to
> damage the trunk? If so is there simple prevention other than
being
> careful where I sail?
>
> Paul Thober

>I plan to build it without modification of ACX, lumberyard #2 pine,
>and epoxy. I am not going to make it a yacht - just sound and
>durable. I am an experienced furniture designer and builder. I am
>unemployed and will work full time (or more) to construct it. Should
>I be able to complete it in a month?