Re: [bolger] Australian Amateur Boatbuilder #38
Gavin-
I've long admired Mippet, but thought the design to be a bit small for any
use I have in mind. How do you use yours? For a look at what happens when a
Mippet gets an overdose of growth hormone look here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MessaboutW/files/FernRidge/2002/
http://www.boat-links.com/messabout/02/Messabout-1.html
I've long admired Mippet, but thought the design to be a bit small for any
use I have in mind. How do you use yours? For a look at what happens when a
Mippet gets an overdose of growth hormone look here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MessaboutW/files/FernRidge/2002/
http://www.boat-links.com/messabout/02/Messabout-1.html
On Tue, 4 Jun 2002 19:12:18 +1000, Gavin Langmuir wrote:
> ...
> an Amesbury Skiff Mippet which has been a delight from day one.
--
John <jkohnen@...>
http://www.boat-links.com/
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. <Groucho Marx>
> > A vessel with a design name that sounds like " wrong psycho""Long Micro", possibly.
In a message dated 04-06-02 8:02:50 PM E. Australia Standard Time,
llangmuir@...writes:
signs them, any more than the US president writes his own speeches even
though he delivers them.
Regards, Gavin Langmuir.
.. and to you,
Howard
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
llangmuir@...writes:
> Greetings Howard,Well I guess PCB doesn't always write his letters these days, even though he
>
> I'm willing to bet that the letter that you refer to in AAB#38 is from
> Bolger.
> I have a couple of letters from him on his letterhead. The royal "we" is
> used occaisionally and it is differcult to tell who exactly is writing. In
> the
> second letter Bolger aknowledged that he was the writer.
signs them, any more than the US president writes his own speeches even
though he delivers them.
> A vessel with a design name that sounds like " wrong psycho"You've lost me there.
>
Regards, Gavin Langmuir.
.. and to you,
Howard
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Greetings Howard,
I'm willing to bet that the letter that you refer to in AAB#38 is from
Bolger.
I have a couple of letters from him on his letterhead. The royal "we" is
used
occaisionally and it is differcult to tell who exactly is writing. In the
second
letter Bolger aknowledged that he was the writer.
On the subject of square boats, I have two Bolger designs, one square , one
not.
A vessel with a design name that sounds like " wrong psycho" which is very
much
modified and getting better all the time, and has been disowned by Bolger
and an
Amesbury Skiff Mippet which has been a delight from day one.
Regards, Gavin Langmuir.
I'm willing to bet that the letter that you refer to in AAB#38 is from
Bolger.
I have a couple of letters from him on his letterhead. The royal "we" is
used
occaisionally and it is differcult to tell who exactly is writing. In the
second
letter Bolger aknowledged that he was the writer.
On the subject of square boats, I have two Bolger designs, one square , one
not.
A vessel with a design name that sounds like " wrong psycho" which is very
much
modified and getting better all the time, and has been disowned by Bolger
and an
Amesbury Skiff Mippet which has been a delight from day one.
Regards, Gavin Langmuir.
; Can I imagine Chay Blythe in a Bolger box?
I<BR>
dunno. I can imagine a young Chay rowing across
the<BR>
Atlantic, which he did, and doing it in a Bolger<BR>
design. Since the debate over Bolger boxes
v.<BR>
traditional-looking designs is waged on the field
of<BR>
aesthetics, not function, it can never be won (or<BR>
lost, for that matter.
I agree about CB, who also had a multihull period, if
I am not mistaken, which is another form of attrocity
to some.
I disagree on several other points. Bolger obviously
believes that the boxes are both less efficient and
aestheticaly perfect, and has said so often. He also
doesn't believe they are necesarily either in some
cases, and wishes people were open to the possibility
at times.
I don't think aesthetics are any the much more
subjective than function, since function flows from
human needs just as surely. There may be a formula
for speed, but the need for speed is a human fancy.
There are many formula's for aesthetics also.
Also, it isn't necesary to come up with boxes when
designing in plywood. There are many beautiful
designs that aren't boxes, that flow from plywood.
Tortured plywood can be very handsome
(www.multihulldesigns.com), as can lapstrake.
The ancients were not necesarily as hung up on
efficiency as we might imagine, cheap labour does
wonders that we rarely see these days. Also they
depended on muscle or wind power for serious purposes,
and might have gone the extra mile for construction if
it ment goods to market at advantageous prices, or
superiority at war.
It is also sometimes hard to prove the superiority of
the box. It depends on circular discusions about what
is the most efficient use of 5', when the measurement
is taken at the gunnels, or the chines. A flared
design like Black skimmer makes better use of its
chine dimension than does a box taken to the same
measure, while the box makes a more efficient use of
the same dimension measured on deck. In the end, the
argument if won for the box saves 99 cents of plywood,
while dooming the boat to a meassly resale. And yet I
love them.
______________________________________________________________________
Find, Connect, Date!http://personals.yahoo.ca
I<BR>
dunno. I can imagine a young Chay rowing across
the<BR>
Atlantic, which he did, and doing it in a Bolger<BR>
design. Since the debate over Bolger boxes
v.<BR>
traditional-looking designs is waged on the field
of<BR>
aesthetics, not function, it can never be won (or<BR>
lost, for that matter.
I agree about CB, who also had a multihull period, if
I am not mistaken, which is another form of attrocity
to some.
I disagree on several other points. Bolger obviously
believes that the boxes are both less efficient and
aestheticaly perfect, and has said so often. He also
doesn't believe they are necesarily either in some
cases, and wishes people were open to the possibility
at times.
I don't think aesthetics are any the much more
subjective than function, since function flows from
human needs just as surely. There may be a formula
for speed, but the need for speed is a human fancy.
There are many formula's for aesthetics also.
Also, it isn't necesary to come up with boxes when
designing in plywood. There are many beautiful
designs that aren't boxes, that flow from plywood.
Tortured plywood can be very handsome
(www.multihulldesigns.com), as can lapstrake.
The ancients were not necesarily as hung up on
efficiency as we might imagine, cheap labour does
wonders that we rarely see these days. Also they
depended on muscle or wind power for serious purposes,
and might have gone the extra mile for construction if
it ment goods to market at advantageous prices, or
superiority at war.
It is also sometimes hard to prove the superiority of
the box. It depends on circular discusions about what
is the most efficient use of 5', when the measurement
is taken at the gunnels, or the chines. A flared
design like Black skimmer makes better use of its
chine dimension than does a box taken to the same
measure, while the box makes a more efficient use of
the same dimension measured on deck. In the end, the
argument if won for the box saves 99 cents of plywood,
while dooming the boat to a meassly resale. And yet I
love them.
______________________________________________________________________
Find, Connect, Date!http://personals.yahoo.ca
Thanks all. I wasn't just being fussy, if there were
several of these floating around I wanted to know. I
agree the construction looks like a great adventure.
New pictures indicate a nacel located dagger board
which is an interesting (not new) idea, if it works.
______________________________________________________________________
Find, Connect, Date!http://personals.yahoo.ca
several of these floating around I wanted to know. I
agree the construction looks like a great adventure.
New pictures indicate a nacel located dagger board
which is an interesting (not new) idea, if it works.
______________________________________________________________________
Find, Connect, Date!http://personals.yahoo.ca
I believe there at least two under construction
Fritz K's in Gustavus is at
http://www.thegreatsea.homestead.com/
Not successful in that it hasn't been launched yet. It is a major
construction effort for one man. Good site if you want to see what can
be done if you put your head down and just keeep ooon goooooing.
HJ
stephensonhw@...wrote:
Fritz K's in Gustavus is at
http://www.thegreatsea.homestead.com/
Not successful in that it hasn't been launched yet. It is a major
construction effort for one man. Good site if you want to see what can
be done if you put your head down and just keeep ooon goooooing.
HJ
stephensonhw@...wrote:
>
> In a message dated 27-05-02 3:43:24 PM E. Australia Standard Time,
>proaconstrictor@...writes:
>
> > Is double eagle a successful design? I thought the
> > only one was under construction in Alaska.
> >
>
> My attempt to summarize the letter may have misled and the word "successful"
> was mine, although the context implies that the various designs mentioned are
> at least to a degree successful. About DE, the letter says: " * the prototype
> 39' x 20' x 16' Double Eagle Gaff-Sloop catamaran."
>
>
In a message dated 27-05-02 3:43:24 PM E. Australia Standard Time,
proaconstrictor@...writes:
was mine, although the context implies that the various designs mentioned are
at least to a degree successful. About DE, the letter says: " * the prototype
39' x 20' x 16' Double Eagle Gaff-Sloop catamaran."
Howard
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
proaconstrictor@...writes:
> Is double eagle a successful design? I thought theMy attempt to summarize the letter may have misled and the word "successful"
> only one was under construction in Alaska.
>
was mine, although the context implies that the various designs mentioned are
at least to a degree successful. About DE, the letter says: " * the prototype
39' x 20' x 16' Double Eagle Gaff-Sloop catamaran."
Howard
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Can I imagine Chay Blythe in a Bolger box? I
dunno. I can imagine a young Chay rowing across the
Atlantic, which he did, and doing it in a Bolger
design. Since the debate over Bolger boxes v.
traditional-looking designs is waged on the field of
aesthetics, not function, it can never be won (or
lost, for that matter). Since Mr. Bolger has amply
demonstrated aesthetic mastery of traditional design
(Monhegan, anybody?) he is operating on a different
plane than our Australian friend. But here is my take
on it.
The traditional boat form was dictated by
function. The materials available to build a boat in
the European tradition were sticks of wood, together
with relatively ineffective fasteners and adhesives.
If you are going to build a vessel of sticks,
watertight, what shape will result? A barrel. The
barrel shape uses the strengths (in compression) of
wood, and its tendency to swell when wet, to create a
strong and (mostly) watertight vessel out of a
material form which is not intuitively suited for it.
Sticks of wood bent over bulkheads create beautiful,
flowing shapes, but more importantly create a useful
vessel which we have become used to as the shape a
vessel should" be. Whether a box shape is more or
less useful for a given situation is immaterial in
traditional construction--it is difficult or
impossible to create a strong and water-tight
box-shaped vessel of any size with traditional
construction (that is why wooden barrels and casks
made to hold liquid were rounded, not the square tanks
that we use today, of metal or plastic).
Conversely, if large, flat, strong and stable sheets
of wood (plywood) had been available to our ancestors,
a quite different aesthetic would have prevailed.
Traditional styles would have utilized flat planes and
conic projections, and we would look at the box
designs quite differently. We would celebrate the
aesthetic of the flat plane. In this alternative
universe, would Bolger, the contrarian, be exploring
the possibilities of "round" boats built of sticks?
If so, Chay Blythe might be sitting in a Loose Moose,
and our Australian friend sniffing about "Bolger
Tubs." My two cents, anyway.
Sam_____________________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
dunno. I can imagine a young Chay rowing across the
Atlantic, which he did, and doing it in a Bolger
design. Since the debate over Bolger boxes v.
traditional-looking designs is waged on the field of
aesthetics, not function, it can never be won (or
lost, for that matter). Since Mr. Bolger has amply
demonstrated aesthetic mastery of traditional design
(Monhegan, anybody?) he is operating on a different
plane than our Australian friend. But here is my take
on it.
The traditional boat form was dictated by
function. The materials available to build a boat in
the European tradition were sticks of wood, together
with relatively ineffective fasteners and adhesives.
If you are going to build a vessel of sticks,
watertight, what shape will result? A barrel. The
barrel shape uses the strengths (in compression) of
wood, and its tendency to swell when wet, to create a
strong and (mostly) watertight vessel out of a
material form which is not intuitively suited for it.
Sticks of wood bent over bulkheads create beautiful,
flowing shapes, but more importantly create a useful
vessel which we have become used to as the shape a
vessel should" be. Whether a box shape is more or
less useful for a given situation is immaterial in
traditional construction--it is difficult or
impossible to create a strong and water-tight
box-shaped vessel of any size with traditional
construction (that is why wooden barrels and casks
made to hold liquid were rounded, not the square tanks
that we use today, of metal or plastic).
Conversely, if large, flat, strong and stable sheets
of wood (plywood) had been available to our ancestors,
a quite different aesthetic would have prevailed.
Traditional styles would have utilized flat planes and
conic projections, and we would look at the box
designs quite differently. We would celebrate the
aesthetic of the flat plane. In this alternative
universe, would Bolger, the contrarian, be exploring
the possibilities of "round" boats built of sticks?
If so, Chay Blythe might be sitting in a Loose Moose,
and our Australian friend sniffing about "Bolger
Tubs." My two cents, anyway.
Sam_____________________________________________________________________
>__________________________________________________
> Find, Connect, Date!http://personals.yahoo.ca
>
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
Is double eagle a successful design? I thought the
only one was under construction in Alaska.
The letter outlines successful designs including LM2
[don't know that one], <BR>
Tahiti, Walrus, Topaz, Wyoming, Double Eagle, Jochems,
Champlain and <BR>
Antispray.
______________________________________________________________________
Find, Connect, Date!http://personals.yahoo.ca
only one was under construction in Alaska.
The letter outlines successful designs including LM2
[don't know that one], <BR>
Tahiti, Walrus, Topaz, Wyoming, Double Eagle, Jochems,
Champlain and <BR>
Antispray.
______________________________________________________________________
Find, Connect, Date!http://personals.yahoo.ca
How presumptuous of Derek Ellard in any case to define someone
else's work. I am positive that hundreds of boat companies and
builders curse PCB and Friends for thinking outside of the box(pun).
The only faithful definition of a boat is still a hole in the water
that we throw prodigious amounts of money at.
In my humble opinion function is art. Bolger designs are some of the
most artful examples of floating devices on this planet. I personally
will not be confined by opinions of those who refuse to recognize
genius and progress. Nothing will elicit sharp attacks faster than a
loss of revenue. I submit that Mr. Bolger has captured the hearts,
minds and pocketbooks of far too many sensible people for the taste
of Mr. Ellard. I just purchased some plans for a Bolger design
through Common Sense Boats. Perhaps a good aged cheddar and sourdough
should be offered to go along with Mr. Ellards strong whine.
John Cupp
else's work. I am positive that hundreds of boat companies and
builders curse PCB and Friends for thinking outside of the box(pun).
The only faithful definition of a boat is still a hole in the water
that we throw prodigious amounts of money at.
In my humble opinion function is art. Bolger designs are some of the
most artful examples of floating devices on this planet. I personally
will not be confined by opinions of those who refuse to recognize
genius and progress. Nothing will elicit sharp attacks faster than a
loss of revenue. I submit that Mr. Bolger has captured the hearts,
minds and pocketbooks of far too many sensible people for the taste
of Mr. Ellard. I just purchased some plans for a Bolger design
through Common Sense Boats. Perhaps a good aged cheddar and sourdough
should be offered to go along with Mr. Ellards strong whine.
John Cupp
In a message dated 25-05-02 10:01:43 PM E. Australia Standard Time,
bruce_hector@...writes:
says it's 37' long and upgraded with 12mm steel plate ballast. So it's
definitely Loose Moose II.
Howard
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
bruce_hector@...writes:
> And I thought it was Long Micro 2, a glass house "Navigator" styleFrom what little information I gave, it could have been, but the PCB letter
> version. sigh...
>
says it's 37' long and upgraded with 12mm steel plate ballast. So it's
definitely Loose Moose II.
Howard
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
And I thought it was Long Micro 2, a glass house "Navigator" style
version. sigh...
version. sigh...
In a message dated 25-05-02 11:40:54 AM E. Australia Standard Time,
porcupine@...writes:
Howard
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
porcupine@...writes:
>Thanks. I know that design, but didn't recognize the abbreviation.
> *That one* is Loose Moose 2, the AS-39. Check it out on Tim Fatchen's
> Square Boats site.
Howard
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
In a message dated 25-05-02 9:46:20 AM E. Australia Standard Time,
prthober@...writes:
point too.
of "scruffie" ("scruffy", I suppose). None of them are very flattering.
Howard
prthober@...writes:
> I worked in retail businesses for many years and one of the mostOne of the other readers' letters in the same issue makes that very valid
> important rules was to never criticize the competition.
point too.
> I can't imagine Chay Blyth eating Haggis... and someone else gives the dictionary meaning and thesaurus equivalents
> and drinking Scotch in a boat called "Shimmy"
of "scruffie" ("scruffy", I suppose). None of them are very flattering.
Howard
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
--- In bolger@y..., stephensonhw@a... wrote:
*That one* is Loose Moose 2, the AS-39. Check it out on Tim Fatchen's
Square Boats site,
porky
> There was discussion here a few weeks ago about Derek Ellard,proprietor of
> Scruffie Marine, criticizing Bolger designs in issue # 37 ofAustralian
> Amateur Boatbuilder....including LM2 (don't know that one)....
> ....[A letter in response from PB&F]outlines successful designs
*That one* is Loose Moose 2, the AS-39. Check it out on Tim Fatchen's
Square Boats site,
porky
I worked in retail businesses for many years and one of the most
important rules was to never criticize the competition. I would tell
the customer to go check out the competition - talk to them, look at
what they have to offer. If you do an above-average job, you can more
or less ignore the competition. The sort of comments attributed to
Derek Ellard smack of insecurity.
Now, having said that, I did look at the Scruffie Marine website -
very nice boats. However, I can't imagine Chay Blyth eating Haggis
and drinking Scotch in a boat called "Shimmy" (I can criticize
Ellard, he is not MY peer)
Paul
important rules was to never criticize the competition. I would tell
the customer to go check out the competition - talk to them, look at
what they have to offer. If you do an above-average job, you can more
or less ignore the competition. The sort of comments attributed to
Derek Ellard smack of insecurity.
Now, having said that, I did look at the Scruffie Marine website -
very nice boats. However, I can't imagine Chay Blyth eating Haggis
and drinking Scotch in a boat called "Shimmy" (I can criticize
Ellard, he is not MY peer)
Paul
On Fri, 24 May 2002stephensonhw@...wrote:
While SA may be a great help to PCB, and a good boat designer, too, she is
not the writer that PCB himself is. In fact, there are few who are as
good a writer as PCB, in any field.
Alas.
> There are several letters to the editor defending Bolger designs,Sounds like Suzanne Altenberger, the "Friend" of Phil Bolger and Friends.
> include one about 1,500 words long signed by PCB himself -- although I
> find it hard to believe he wrote it. The letter refers to himself
> several times in the third person singular and occasionally uses the
> royal "we"
> It also implies that PCB spoke with Ellard on the phone until EllardThat pretty much clinches it.
> hung up on "us". There is a short letter from Ellard in reply, saying
> that he has never spoken to PCB. Het did receive a call from "a German
> or Dutch person", but denies hanging up on that person.
While SA may be a great help to PCB, and a good boat designer, too, she is
not the writer that PCB himself is. In fact, there are few who are as
good a writer as PCB, in any field.
Alas.
There was discussion here a few weeks ago about Derek Ellard, proprietor of
Scruffie Marine, criticizing Bolger designs in issue # 37 of Australian
Amateur Boatbuilder.
Issue #38 hit the newsstands this week and Ellard, in his "Scruffie World
News" feature, continues the attack. He asks "Can you imagine the likes of
Ian Murray, Chay Blyth or Eric Tabarlay in a "Bolger Box?" and goes on to
suggest suitable names for Bolger boats. "Oblong Cassidy" is probably the
kindest of them.
There are several letters to the editor defending Bolger designs, include one
about 1,500 words long signed by PCB himself -- although I find it hard to
believe he wrote it. The letter refers to himself several times in the third
person singular and occasionally uses the royal "we", e.g.: "... eventually a
book will see the light of day solely devoted to just our output of
'squarish' and related craft discussing all 110+ designs...tracking ... what
we've learnt ...". I look forward to seeing that book.
The letter outlines successful designs including LM2 [don't know that one],
Tahiti, Walrus, Topaz, Wyoming, Double Eagle, Jochems, Champlain and
Antispray. It also refers to historical examples of successful square boats
built by the Egyptians, Chinese and Romans.
It also implies that PCB spoke with Ellard on the phone until Ellard hung up
on "us". There is a short letter from Ellard in reply, saying that he has
never spoken to PCB. Het did receive a call from "a German or Dutch person",
but denies hanging up on that person.
In my view this kind of correspondence does neither Ellard nor PCB any good.
A look through www.scruffie.com will allow to form your own opinion of
Ellard's designs and perhaps work out how his boats are built.
Howard
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Scruffie Marine, criticizing Bolger designs in issue # 37 of Australian
Amateur Boatbuilder.
Issue #38 hit the newsstands this week and Ellard, in his "Scruffie World
News" feature, continues the attack. He asks "Can you imagine the likes of
Ian Murray, Chay Blyth or Eric Tabarlay in a "Bolger Box?" and goes on to
suggest suitable names for Bolger boats. "Oblong Cassidy" is probably the
kindest of them.
There are several letters to the editor defending Bolger designs, include one
about 1,500 words long signed by PCB himself -- although I find it hard to
believe he wrote it. The letter refers to himself several times in the third
person singular and occasionally uses the royal "we", e.g.: "... eventually a
book will see the light of day solely devoted to just our output of
'squarish' and related craft discussing all 110+ designs...tracking ... what
we've learnt ...". I look forward to seeing that book.
The letter outlines successful designs including LM2 [don't know that one],
Tahiti, Walrus, Topaz, Wyoming, Double Eagle, Jochems, Champlain and
Antispray. It also refers to historical examples of successful square boats
built by the Egyptians, Chinese and Romans.
It also implies that PCB spoke with Ellard on the phone until Ellard hung up
on "us". There is a short letter from Ellard in reply, saying that he has
never spoken to PCB. Het did receive a call from "a German or Dutch person",
but denies hanging up on that person.
In my view this kind of correspondence does neither Ellard nor PCB any good.
A look through www.scruffie.com will allow to form your own opinion of
Ellard's designs and perhaps work out how his boats are built.
Howard
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]