Re: Another dory question
John Gardner, is probably the absolute authority on Dories in all
their various form says that, "The flared, straight sides of the
Banks Dory permit these boats to be stacked one inside another".
The Dory Book that he wrote shows many examples of Banks Dories that
look exactly like the Big Dory from Bolger and the smaller G. Gull.
The larger Bolger Dory has a thousand pound displacement, much more
than a two man fishing crew and tackle. In Actuality Bolger's dory
looks more on the line of the US Coast Guard Dory that like the
Bolger Big Dory is a bit narrower on the bottom but the same width at
the gunnels. The US Coast Guard found it to be more stable than other
boats to launch for rescue. They were used during WWII to rescue many
merchant mariners who were torpedoed by German U boats right off our
own coast.
Going off subject our government covered up some of the most
horrendous losses of WWII where hundreds of allied ships were sunk.
Not a positive story for 1943 but Americans should learn how close
our sailors died inside US waters. It is a shame that those brave
proud men were never awarded the same recognition as the theaters in
Europe and the Pacific. The US Coast Guard saved many lives and a
portion were from Banks style Dories. (back on subject)
John
their various form says that, "The flared, straight sides of the
Banks Dory permit these boats to be stacked one inside another".
The Dory Book that he wrote shows many examples of Banks Dories that
look exactly like the Big Dory from Bolger and the smaller G. Gull.
The larger Bolger Dory has a thousand pound displacement, much more
than a two man fishing crew and tackle. In Actuality Bolger's dory
looks more on the line of the US Coast Guard Dory that like the
Bolger Big Dory is a bit narrower on the bottom but the same width at
the gunnels. The US Coast Guard found it to be more stable than other
boats to launch for rescue. They were used during WWII to rescue many
merchant mariners who were torpedoed by German U boats right off our
own coast.
Going off subject our government covered up some of the most
horrendous losses of WWII where hundreds of allied ships were sunk.
Not a positive story for 1943 but Americans should learn how close
our sailors died inside US waters. It is a shame that those brave
proud men were never awarded the same recognition as the theaters in
Europe and the Pacific. The US Coast Guard saved many lives and a
portion were from Banks style Dories. (back on subject)
John
--- In bolger@y..., "s_paskey" <s_paskey@y...> wrote:
> Others may have a different take on it, but I'd regard a "Gloucester
> Gull" or other "light" dory to be a "banks-style" dory. Narrow flat
> bottom, flat sides, lots of flare, and quite different from the
> various multi-chined dories (swampscotts, surf dories, gunning
> dories, etc.)
>
> --- In bolger@y..., "Lincoln Ross" <lincolnr@r...> wrote:
> > Aren't a Banks dory and a light dory entirely different animals?
If
> > I'm not mistaken, a Banks dory would have much higher
displacement.
Others may have a different take on it, but I'd regard a "Gloucester
Gull" or other "light" dory to be a "banks-style" dory. Narrow flat
bottom, flat sides, lots of flare, and quite different from the
various multi-chined dories (swampscotts, surf dories, gunning
dories, etc.)
Gull" or other "light" dory to be a "banks-style" dory. Narrow flat
bottom, flat sides, lots of flare, and quite different from the
various multi-chined dories (swampscotts, surf dories, gunning
dories, etc.)
--- In bolger@y..., "Lincoln Ross" <lincolnr@r...> wrote:
> Aren't a Banks dory and a light dory entirely different animals? If
> I'm not mistaken, a Banks dory would have much higher displacement.
Aren't a Banks dory and a light dory entirely different animals? If
I'm not mistaken, a Banks dory would have much higher displacement.
I'm not mistaken, a Banks dory would have much higher displacement.
--- In bolger@y..., "s_paskey" <s_paskey@y...> wrote:
> I've been thinking about the possibility of building one light
> banks-style dory or another, and I'm hoping someone can answer a
> question.
>
> In Small Boats and in posts on this list, it's been suggested that
> the double-ended stern on Bolger's "Light Dory Type V" is easier to
> build than the traditional transom stern.
>
> It seems to me that it's simply a matter of cutting bevels on a
> sternpost versus cutting bevels on a triangular transom. What am I
> missing, and why is the transom stern more difficult?
>
> Thanks!
> Stephen
The notch for an older style Banks Dory, a boat both beamier and higher sided than the
light one's after Gloucester Gull, may have been more useful.
Mark
Sam Glasscock wrote:
light one's after Gloucester Gull, may have been more useful.
Mark
Sam Glasscock wrote:
>In my
> experience the sculling notch on the dory is a
> stylistic detail--the extreme stern section doen't
> have the bouyancy to take a sitting sculler, and the
> dories are not realy suitable for standing.o
The tombstone stern is not greatly difficult to build.
It is somewhat time consuming. At least on the
twenty-foot dory, it is constucted of a plywood skin
over a frame built out of two pieces of one-by plank.
It not only has to be beveled, but the sculling notch
cut in. Not difficult, but time consuming; the only
piece of real carpentry on the boat.
If you like the look (and it is a pretty thing) you
won't have trouble with it, but the pointed stern on
the "type V" would certainly be quicker. In my
experience the sculling notch on the dory is a
stylistic detail--the extreme stern section doen't
have the bouyancy to take a sitting sculler, and the
dories are not realy suitable for standing. Of
course, there may be some technique I don't know
about, but I have never found a use for the notch.
Sam
--- s_paskey <s_paskey@...> wrote:
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus � Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
It is somewhat time consuming. At least on the
twenty-foot dory, it is constucted of a plywood skin
over a frame built out of two pieces of one-by plank.
It not only has to be beveled, but the sculling notch
cut in. Not difficult, but time consuming; the only
piece of real carpentry on the boat.
If you like the look (and it is a pretty thing) you
won't have trouble with it, but the pointed stern on
the "type V" would certainly be quicker. In my
experience the sculling notch on the dory is a
stylistic detail--the extreme stern section doen't
have the bouyancy to take a sitting sculler, and the
dories are not realy suitable for standing. Of
course, there may be some technique I don't know
about, but I have never found a use for the notch.
Sam
--- s_paskey <s_paskey@...> wrote:
> I've been thinking about the possibility of building__________________________________________________
> one light
> banks-style dory or another, and I'm hoping someone
> can answer a
> question.
>
> In Small Boats and in posts on this list, it's been
> suggested that
> the double-ended stern on Bolger's "Light Dory Type
> V" is easier to
> build than the traditional transom stern.
>
> It seems to me that it's simply a matter of cutting
> bevels on a
> sternpost versus cutting bevels on a triangular
> transom. What am I
> missing, and why is the transom stern more
> difficult?
>
> Thanks!
> Stephen
>
>
>
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus � Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
I've been thinking about the possibility of building one light
banks-style dory or another, and I'm hoping someone can answer a
question.
In Small Boats and in posts on this list, it's been suggested that
the double-ended stern on Bolger's "Light Dory Type V" is easier to
build than the traditional transom stern.
It seems to me that it's simply a matter of cutting bevels on a
sternpost versus cutting bevels on a triangular transom. What am I
missing, and why is the transom stern more difficult?
Thanks!
Stephen
banks-style dory or another, and I'm hoping someone can answer a
question.
In Small Boats and in posts on this list, it's been suggested that
the double-ended stern on Bolger's "Light Dory Type V" is easier to
build than the traditional transom stern.
It seems to me that it's simply a matter of cutting bevels on a
sternpost versus cutting bevels on a triangular transom. What am I
missing, and why is the transom stern more difficult?
Thanks!
Stephen