Re: [bolger] Re: SBJ Cartoon #19/fast sneakeasy
On Friday, September 27, 2002, at 06:31 PM, Lincoln Ross wrote:
a fast Sneaskeasy would be heavier than the standard version.
BTW I checked Slicer over the weekend and Bolger says the hull is
good for less the 20 knots/mph.
hal
> If this is really like a Sneakeasy, it might be light enough that theI would think that with the same or stronger scantlings as the Utility
> aero problems will occure at a slower speed than on the utility.
a fast Sneaskeasy would be heavier than the standard version.
BTW I checked Slicer over the weekend and Bolger says the hull is
good for less the 20 knots/mph.
> If you want a fast but retro boat, how about a 1:1 Turbinia repro?Now that makes the imagination race. I love it.
>http://www.uh.edu/engines/turbinia.jpg
hal
I agree. its a very good start.
CCG
Hal Lynch wrote:
CCG
Hal Lynch wrote:
On Friday, September 27, 2002, at 11:14 AM, brucehallman wrote:
Much good stuff deleted
>http://www.hallman.org/bolger/SBJ_19/
This is it?! And by the master himself. With a simple? adaptation,
from the chine down, to the increased length of Sneakeasy we have
the bottom we have been lusting for. The only real problems are,
radically different shape of the stem, and displacement, and....
For a rough approximation scale the longitudinal dimensions by 1.5.
hal
Bolger rules!!!
- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
- add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
- To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
If this is really like a Sneakeasy, it might be light enough that the
aero problems will occure at a slower speed than on the utility.
However, we had an outboard skiff 18 feet long that would do 40 when
all was clean, and I never felt anything weird. Of course after a few
weeks of algae on the bottom or a nick in the prop it wouldn't do this
anymore, so I don't have a lot of experience at that speed.
If you want a fast but retro boat, how about a 1:1 Turbinia repro?
http://www.uh.edu/engines/turbinia.jpg
aero problems will occure at a slower speed than on the utility.
However, we had an outboard skiff 18 feet long that would do 40 when
all was clean, and I never felt anything weird. Of course after a few
weeks of algae on the bottom or a nick in the prop it wouldn't do this
anymore, so I don't have a lot of experience at that speed.
If you want a fast but retro boat, how about a 1:1 Turbinia repro?
http://www.uh.edu/engines/turbinia.jpg
--- In bolger@y..., Hal Lynch <hal@c...> wrote:
snip snip snip
>
> Bolger says the out board utility should max out about 40. I'm not
sure
> I would want to go faster.
>
> There are a lot of ifs in this idea. The only thing I am sure of is
> that the
> resulting boat would not be a Sneakeasy. Hopefully a strong
> resemblance but thats all.
>
> hal
On Friday, September 27, 2002, at 04:21 PM, Lincoln Ross wrote:
I would want to go faster.
There are a lot of ifs in this idea. The only thing I am sure of is
that the
resulting boat would not be a Sneakeasy. Hopefully a strong
resemblance but thats all.
hal
> I'm not sure this is any closer in form to Sneakeasy than Slicer is.I will have to look at Slicer again.
> And Slicer is the right size, approximately.
> I think part ofYou are right about that. I don't know if that issue can be resolved.
> Sneakeasy's charm comes from the plumb stem, anyway.
> Are we sayingI think so.
> that this sort of hull form is better at high speeds than Bolger's
> alternate Sneakeasy design with the box cutwater or whatever it's
> called?
> I should think any of these things, if builtBolger says the out board utility should max out about 40. I'm not sure
> light, would have aerodynamic problems at speeds over 40 or 50mph, as
> in flipping over and such.
I would want to go faster.
There are a lot of ifs in this idea. The only thing I am sure of is
that the
resulting boat would not be a Sneakeasy. Hopefully a strong
resemblance but thats all.
hal
I'm not sure this is any closer in form to Sneakeasy than Slicer is.
And Slicer is the right size, approximately. I think part of
Sneakeasy's charm comes from the plumb stem, anyway. Are we saying
that this sort of hull form is better at high speeds than Bolger's
alternate Sneakeasy design with the box cutwater or whatever it's
called? (I don't know if lines are online, tho pics are, someplace,
but it's in BwaOM). I should think any of these things, if built
light, would have aerodynamic problems at speeds over 40 or 50mph, as
in flipping over and such. I think if I acquired lots of bucks (to
substitute for time at (currently hypothetical)work) I might be forced
to make the 2nd version. But then again I like displacement hulls...
And Slicer is the right size, approximately. I think part of
Sneakeasy's charm comes from the plumb stem, anyway. Are we saying
that this sort of hull form is better at high speeds than Bolger's
alternate Sneakeasy design with the box cutwater or whatever it's
called? (I don't know if lines are online, tho pics are, someplace,
but it's in BwaOM). I should think any of these things, if built
light, would have aerodynamic problems at speeds over 40 or 50mph, as
in flipping over and such. I think if I acquired lots of bucks (to
substitute for time at (currently hypothetical)work) I might be forced
to make the 2nd version. But then again I like displacement hulls...
--- In bolger@y..., Hal Lynch <hal@c...> wrote:
>
> On Friday, September 27, 2002, at 11:14 AM, brucehallman wrote:
>
> Much good stuff deleted
>
> >http://www.hallman.org/bolger/SBJ_19/
>
>
> This is it?! And by the master himself. With a simple? adaptation,
> from the chine down, to the increased length of Sneakeasy we have
> the bottom we have been lusting for. The only real problems are,
> radically different shape of the stem, and displacement, and....
>
> For a rough approximation scale the longitudinal dimensions by 1.5.
>
>
> hal
On Friday, September 27, 2002, at 11:14 AM, brucehallman wrote:
Much good stuff deleted
>http://www.hallman.org/bolger/SBJ_19/
This is it?! And by the master himself. With a simple? adaptation,
from the chine down, to the increased length of Sneakeasy we have
the bottom we have been lusting for. The only real problems are,
radically different shape of the stem, and displacement, and....
For a rough approximation scale the longitudinal dimensions by 1.5.
hal
Small Boat Journal #43
Cartoon #19
June/July 1985
===================
An Outboard Utility
===================
A common criticism of PCB is
that all to often he thumbs
his nose at 'conventional
wisdom', preferring instead to
experiment with new ideas.
He pretty much admits this
'flaw' is his character.
PCB writes regarding SBJ_19:
"This is supposed to be a
good boat of normal type
with no freak features at
all. (It's not in character,
I know, but its probably
good for me to suppress
my instinct to treat every
single design as one more
chance to experiment.) "
I think Cartoon #19 is interesting
because it proves that PCB can,
and has, designed 'conventional'
boats, and critics cannot fairly
'pigeon hole' and dismiss him as
being simply an eccentric.
http://www.hallman.org/bolger/SBJ_19/
Cartoon #19
June/July 1985
===================
An Outboard Utility
===================
A common criticism of PCB is
that all to often he thumbs
his nose at 'conventional
wisdom', preferring instead to
experiment with new ideas.
He pretty much admits this
'flaw' is his character.
PCB writes regarding SBJ_19:
"This is supposed to be a
good boat of normal type
with no freak features at
all. (It's not in character,
I know, but its probably
good for me to suppress
my instinct to treat every
single design as one more
chance to experiment.) "
I think Cartoon #19 is interesting
because it proves that PCB can,
and has, designed 'conventional'
boats, and critics cannot fairly
'pigeon hole' and dismiss him as
being simply an eccentric.
http://www.hallman.org/bolger/SBJ_19/