Re: The Light Scooner Margaret Ellen
Have you seen the , I think June, issue of Wooden Boat? The
Launchings page has the Light Scooner with a Bolger designed bald-
headed double identical gaff rig. A bit simpler for a singlehander,
but not quite the rum runner schooner look.
DonB
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "oceanplodder2003" <dana-
tenacity@u...> wrote:
Launchings page has the Light Scooner with a Bolger designed bald-
headed double identical gaff rig. A bit simpler for a singlehander,
but not quite the rum runner schooner look.
DonB
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "oceanplodder2003" <dana-
tenacity@u...> wrote:
> You rocket scientists!!!!
>
> I was going to build it, build a 2nd board with 125lbs of lead a la
> H&H schooner, leave the rest of the board hollow, then add lead in
> small increments till the boat would pop up after pulling the
> masthead to the water at the launching ramp.
You rocket scientists!!!!
I was going to build it, build a 2nd board with 125lbs of lead a la
H&H schooner, leave the rest of the board hollow, then add lead in
small increments till the boat would pop up after pulling the
masthead to the water at the launching ramp.
I was going to build it, build a 2nd board with 125lbs of lead a la
H&H schooner, leave the rest of the board hollow, then add lead in
small increments till the boat would pop up after pulling the
masthead to the water at the launching ramp.
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Lincoln Ross <lincolnr@r...> wrote:
> Yah, but it puts a much larger premium on doing everything exactly
> right. If you don't know roughly what to expect, then you don't
know
> when you dropped a digit or something. I understand this approach
was
> much more common in the days of slide rules when you had to keep
track
> of the decimal point yourself. I am one of those people who
forgets
> formulas, so I have to be able to reconstruct them. Someone had to
do
> that in the first place anyway. If you figure out how it works,
you
> don't have to guess, you know. And crunching the numbers just
tells you
> exactly how much. If you don't know how it works, then there's a
big
> chance of using the wrong formula. Especially if there's a
misprint in
> the textbook! (How many editors know calculus? How many
typesetters?)
>
> >Robert Gainer" <robert_gainer@h...>
> >
> >
> >wrote:
> >If you want to discuss two different boats, why don't you do the
math and
> >put numbers to it. Don't waste time with a guess or speculate
about the
> >stability. If you want I can run the numbers and tell you what
the stability
> >is with any weight of crew you want. If you just want to scale a
design this
> >is how it works.
> >Déjà vu all over again.
> >Bob
> >
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "rogerleroy" <rogerleroy@y...> wrote:
wouldnt bet money on it being of any use.
No ballast. Longer boat ,no sails overhanging the ends. smaller
sailarea. everyone sits low on the floorlike sandbags and are under
orders not to panic.
My betst crew was my 2 overweight inlaws sitting close together
amidships . i make the boat heel in all winds. and let the peak fall
off when the wind gets up.
I note that David hoists sail with a concrete mooring block stuck on
the bow. cheers Paul
> How much ballast would you say a FS would need?The FS has floation in the bow stern and both hulls amidships. I
>
wouldnt bet money on it being of any use.
No ballast. Longer boat ,no sails overhanging the ends. smaller
sailarea. everyone sits low on the floorlike sandbags and are under
orders not to panic.
My betst crew was my 2 overweight inlaws sitting close together
amidships . i make the boat heel in all winds. and let the peak fall
off when the wind gets up.
I note that David hoists sail with a concrete mooring block stuck on
the bow. cheers Paul
I'm not sure I understand your question. The Folding Schooner is an
unballasted design. As drawn I don't think it has any positive
flotation beyond the wood used to build her.
There's a photo in Instant Boats of one being sailed by PCB and
Dynamite Payson. That seems reasonable enough if there isn't too much
wind. I've had nine adults aboard the LSME, which was neither too
crowded, nor enough ballast for the conditions. Over we went.
YIBB,
David
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
unballasted design. As drawn I don't think it has any positive
flotation beyond the wood used to build her.
There's a photo in Instant Boats of one being sailed by PCB and
Dynamite Payson. That seems reasonable enough if there isn't too much
wind. I've had nine adults aboard the LSME, which was neither too
crowded, nor enough ballast for the conditions. Over we went.
YIBB,
David
>How much ballast would you say a FS would need?--
>
>--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, David Ryan <david@c...> wrote:
>> More less the same beam, more or less the same shape, more or less
>> the same weight. Waterline 33% longer. Seems to me (I could be
>wrong)
>> there's more boat to push underwater on the lee side of the longer
>> boat.
>>
>> YIBB,
>>
>> David
>>
>> >Oh no. Not this again! That's only if you increase beam
>proportionally
>> >and increase displacement with cube of LWL, and use a similar
>shape.
>> >Folding Schooner beam was alleged to be the same. Crew size is
>probably
>> >more significant than boat weight on these types, unless you
>ballast. In
>> >general, for similar shaped boats, whose weight relates normally
>to LWL,
>> >then of course Skene's is right. But our example is not like that.
>> >
>> >>>From Skene's Elements of Yacht Design, 8th edition on page
>38. "Heeling
>> >>moment of wind pressure on sails varies as the cube of L.W.L."
>and
>> >>"Stability varies as the fourth power of the L.W.L." so "power
>to carry sail
>> >>increases much faster than the heeling moment" as the size of
>the boat
>> >>increases.
>> >>All the best;
>> >>Bob
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >Bolger rules!!!
>> >- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
>> >- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred'
>posts
>> >- Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
>> >- 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
>> >Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>>
>> C.E.P.
>> 415 W.46th Street
>> New York, New York 10036
>>http://www.crumblingempire.com
>> Mobile (646) 325-8325
>> Office (212) 247-0296
>
>
>
>
>Bolger rules!!!
>- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
>- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
>- Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
>- 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
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
How much ballast would you say a FS would need?
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, David Ryan <david@c...> wrote:
> More less the same beam, more or less the same shape, more or less
> the same weight. Waterline 33% longer. Seems to me (I could be
wrong)
> there's more boat to push underwater on the lee side of the longer
> boat.
>
> YIBB,
>
> David
>
> >Oh no. Not this again! That's only if you increase beam
proportionally
> >and increase displacement with cube of LWL, and use a similar
shape.
> >Folding Schooner beam was alleged to be the same. Crew size is
probably
> >more significant than boat weight on these types, unless you
ballast. In
> >general, for similar shaped boats, whose weight relates normally
to LWL,
> >then of course Skene's is right. But our example is not like that.
> >
> >>>From Skene's Elements of Yacht Design, 8th edition on page
38. "Heeling
> >>moment of wind pressure on sails varies as the cube of L.W.L."
and
> >>"Stability varies as the fourth power of the L.W.L." so "power
to carry sail
> >>increases much faster than the heeling moment" as the size of
the boat
> >>increases.
> >>All the best;
> >>Bob
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Bolger rules!!!
> >- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
> >- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred'
posts
> >- Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
> >- 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
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
>
> C.E.P.
> 415 W.46th Street
> New York, New York 10036
>http://www.crumblingempire.com
> Mobile (646) 325-8325
> Office (212) 247-0296
Yah, but it puts a much larger premium on doing everything exactly
right. If you don't know roughly what to expect, then you don't know
when you dropped a digit or something. I understand this approach was
much more common in the days of slide rules when you had to keep track
of the decimal point yourself. I am one of those people who forgets
formulas, so I have to be able to reconstruct them. Someone had to do
that in the first place anyway. If you figure out how it works, you
don't have to guess, you know. And crunching the numbers just tells you
exactly how much. If you don't know how it works, then there's a big
chance of using the wrong formula. Especially if there's a misprint in
the textbook! (How many editors know calculus? How many typesetters?)
right. If you don't know roughly what to expect, then you don't know
when you dropped a digit or something. I understand this approach was
much more common in the days of slide rules when you had to keep track
of the decimal point yourself. I am one of those people who forgets
formulas, so I have to be able to reconstruct them. Someone had to do
that in the first place anyway. If you figure out how it works, you
don't have to guess, you know. And crunching the numbers just tells you
exactly how much. If you don't know how it works, then there's a big
chance of using the wrong formula. Especially if there's a misprint in
the textbook! (How many editors know calculus? How many typesetters?)
>Robert Gainer" <robert_gainer@...>
>
>
>wrote:
>If you want to discuss two different boats, why don’t you do the math and
>put numbers to it. Don’t waste time with a guess or speculate about the
>stability. If you want I can run the numbers and tell you what the stability
>is with any weight of crew you want. If you just want to scale a design this
>is how it works.
>Déjà vu all over again.
>Bob
>
More boat won't go under unless you use more weight to push it. Maybe,
as you jack more hull out of the water, the part that's in will be a
little more off center, I suppose.
as you jack more hull out of the water, the part that's in will be a
little more off center, I suppose.
> David Ryan <david@...>
>
> wrote: More less the same beam, more or less the same shape, more or
> less the same weight. Waterline 33% longer. Seems to me (I could be
> wrong) there's more boat to push underwater on the lee side of the
> longer boat. YIBB, David
>
>
If stability is the function of the movement of the center of buoyancy and
its relationship to the center of gravity as you heel. Then the same midship
shape will have the same change in the position of the center of buoyancy as
you heel. And with the same weight you must have the same volume under the
water and center of gravity that also moves the same way. Why don�t the two
boats have the same stability?
Bob
its relationship to the center of gravity as you heel. Then the same midship
shape will have the same change in the position of the center of buoyancy as
you heel. And with the same weight you must have the same volume under the
water and center of gravity that also moves the same way. Why don�t the two
boats have the same stability?
Bob
>From: Lincoln Ross <lincolnr@...>
>Reply-To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
>To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [bolger] RE: Re: The Light Scooner Margaret Ellen
>Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 15:08:41 -0700
>
>More boat won't go under unless you use more weight to push it. Maybe,
>as you jack more hull out of the water, the part that's in will be a
>little more off center, I suppose.
>
> > David Ryan <david@...>
> >
> > wrote: More less the same beam, more or less the same shape, more or
> > less the same weight. Waterline 33% longer. Seems to me (I could be
> > wrong) there's more boat to push underwater on the lee side of the
> > longer boat. YIBB, David
> >
> >
>
> We'll fire grapeshot onWe throw cherry pits since cherries are the Official Fruit of
> anyone who looks upon us cross-eyed.
Independence Day around our house. I wouldn't waste a whole grape.
Blueberries are the official fruit of July 3, my daughter's
birthday. Birthday cake and blueberry pie are both required.
I bet it was harder for you to singlehand before you taught the dog
to steer!
Peter
> Not to be nit-picking, but upon my upcoming launch,LOTS OF PICTURES! THINK RIG SHOTS! KNOW JASON IS TOO DUMB TO FIGURE
> I want to fly the flag correctly.
ALL THIS OUT.
Can't really tell you much about the flag, except that it was that
way when the sails arrived from their previous boat, the late Light
Scooner Allison Might.
I have a rather large (compared to the boat) First Naval Jack (the
candy striped Don't Tread Upon Me flag) which I intend to fly off the
tip of the main gaff on the Fourth of July. I don't know if that's
proper flag protocol. I don't care either. We'll fire grapeshot on
anyone who looks upon us cross-eyed.
I have no opinion about your flag situation, save that you should fly
what flags you want as you want to fly them.
YIBB,
David
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
way when the sails arrived from their previous boat, the late Light
Scooner Allison Might.
I have a rather large (compared to the boat) First Naval Jack (the
candy striped Don't Tread Upon Me flag) which I intend to fly off the
tip of the main gaff on the Fourth of July. I don't know if that's
proper flag protocol. I don't care either. We'll fire grapeshot on
anyone who looks upon us cross-eyed.
I have no opinion about your flag situation, save that you should fly
what flags you want as you want to fly them.
YIBB,
David
>David, in your photo,--
>
>http://www.crumblingempire.com/ScoonerRigging02.jpg
>
>you have the US Ensign flying about 1/3 the way down
>the leech of the aftermost sail. Which I understand to
>be proper flag protocol. [Though is your flag the correct
>size?]
>
>I wonder what your opinion is for correct protocol
>for flying the US Ensign flag on a Chinese Gaff cat
>yawl rig? From the leech of the mizzen sail? Or,
>should I ask PCB for his opinion on this?
>
>Not to be nit-picking, but upon my upcoming launch,
>I want to fly the flag correctly.
>
>
>
>Bolger rules!!!
>- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
>- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
>- Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
>- 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
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
David, in your photo,
http://www.crumblingempire.com/ScoonerRigging02.jpg
you have the US Ensign flying about 1/3 the way down
the leech of the aftermost sail. Which I understand to
be proper flag protocol. [Though is your flag the correct
size?]
I wonder what your opinion is for correct protocol
for flying the US Ensign flag on a Chinese Gaff cat
yawl rig? From the leech of the mizzen sail? Or,
should I ask PCB for his opinion on this?
Not to be nit-picking, but upon my upcoming launch,
I want to fly the flag correctly.
http://www.crumblingempire.com/ScoonerRigging02.jpg
you have the US Ensign flying about 1/3 the way down
the leech of the aftermost sail. Which I understand to
be proper flag protocol. [Though is your flag the correct
size?]
I wonder what your opinion is for correct protocol
for flying the US Ensign flag on a Chinese Gaff cat
yawl rig? From the leech of the mizzen sail? Or,
should I ask PCB for his opinion on this?
Not to be nit-picking, but upon my upcoming launch,
I want to fly the flag correctly.
>--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Hallman <bruce@h...> wrote:I seem to remember the phrase being "one man per mast", which
>> Why not a Folding Schooner?
> I would suspect that although schooner rigs were invented to be
>handled byfewer crew they didnt mean no crew.
> 10 points to david for managingto hoist all sailwithjust his dog.
>How did you do it David?
apparently was fewer than were needed to man a square rigger. I think
that four people who all knew the way the boat worked would be very
fun in a Light Scooner, you might even be able to fly the staysail
(which I've never done.)
As far as rigging goes, if my boat is just hull and masts, I bring
her into shallow water, lay her over on her side and rig her lying
down.
The past few days, I've been leaving the sails bent on and using the
lacing and/or sheet as a brail to bundle the whole thing up. Starting
with the mainsail and working forward, it's really not that big a
trick:
http://www.crumblingempire.com/ScoonerRigging.jpg
http://www.crumblingempire.com/ScoonerRigging01.jpg
http://www.crumblingempire.com/ScoonerRigging02.jpg
And underway:
http://www.crumblingempire.com/scooner6.20.jpg
You'll notice that in the rigging sequence there's no jib halyard, so
I end up having to knock her over any how to thread it through the
block on the forward side of the foremast. When we put her away last
night I took a few minutes to figure hour to bundle up the jib and
lash it to the sprit with the halyard left in place.
I also realized yesterday that my widened decks have an advantage I
like; it's very easy to move for and aft in the boat simply by
running up and down the deck. Next time I paint, I'm going to dust in
some anti-slip sand to make it even easier.
However, as far as singlehanding is concerned, it's worth taking a
look at the cockpit in the SHS, and reading Bolger's explanation as
to why it's designed that way. After four years of sailing the LSME
(mostly) singlehanded, I concur.
YIBB,
David
--
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Hallman <bruce@h...> wrote:
shoreand the outboard wont pull you off. she's hard to SH even
without the sails. last trip out I stopped unfolding when a nasty
crosswind on the ramp started to tip the whole rig.
I would suspect that although schooner rigs were invented to be
handled byfewer crew they didnt mean no crew.
10 points to david for managingto hoist all sailwithjust his dog.
How did you do it David?
cheers Paul
> Why not a Folding Schooner?sounds like a good idea till you get caught pinnned to a choppy
shoreand the outboard wont pull you off. she's hard to SH even
without the sails. last trip out I stopped unfolding when a nasty
crosswind on the ramp started to tip the whole rig.
I would suspect that although schooner rigs were invented to be
handled byfewer crew they didnt mean no crew.
10 points to david for managingto hoist all sailwithjust his dog.
How did you do it David?
cheers Paul
Oh no. Not this again! That's only if you increase beam proportionally
and increase displacement with cube of LWL, and use a similar shape.
Folding Schooner beam was alleged to be the same. Crew size is probably
more significant than boat weight on these types, unless you ballast. In
general, for similar shaped boats, whose weight relates normally to LWL,
then of course Skene's is right. But our example is not like that.
and increase displacement with cube of LWL, and use a similar shape.
Folding Schooner beam was alleged to be the same. Crew size is probably
more significant than boat weight on these types, unless you ballast. In
general, for similar shaped boats, whose weight relates normally to LWL,
then of course Skene's is right. But our example is not like that.
>>From Skene’s Elements of Yacht Design, 8th edition on page 38. “Heeling
>moment of wind pressure on sails varies as the cube of L.W.L.” and
>“Stability varies as the fourth power of the L.W.L.” so “power to carry sail
>increases much faster than the heeling moment” as the size of the boat
>increases.
>All the best;
>Bob
>
If you want to discuss two different boats, why don�t you do the math and
put numbers to it. Don�t waste time with a guess or speculate about the
stability. If you want I can run the numbers and tell you what the stability
is with any weight of crew you want. If you just want to scale a design this
is how it works.
D�j� vu all over again.
Bob
put numbers to it. Don�t waste time with a guess or speculate about the
stability. If you want I can run the numbers and tell you what the stability
is with any weight of crew you want. If you just want to scale a design this
is how it works.
D�j� vu all over again.
Bob
>From: Lincoln Ross <lincolnr@...>
>Reply-To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
>To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [bolger] RE: Re: The Light Scooner Margaret Ellen
>Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 18:19:01 -0700
>
>Oh no. Not this again! That's only if you increase beam proportionally
>and increase displacement with cube of LWL, and use a similar shape.
>Folding Schooner beam was alleged to be the same. Crew size is probably
>more significant than boat weight on these types, unless you ballast. In
>general, for similar shaped boats, whose weight relates normally to LWL,
>then of course Skene's is right. But our example is not like that.
>
> >>From Skene�s Elements of Yacht Design, 8th edition on page 38. �Heeling
> >moment of wind pressure on sails varies as the cube of L.W.L.� and
> >�Stability varies as the fourth power of the L.W.L.� so �power to carry
>sail
> >increases much faster than the heeling moment� as the size of the boat
> >increases.
> >All the best;
> >Bob
> >
>
>
>
>
>Bolger rules!!!
>- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
>- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
>- Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
>- 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
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
More less the same beam, more or less the same shape, more or less
the same weight. Waterline 33% longer. Seems to me (I could be wrong)
there's more boat to push underwater on the lee side of the longer
boat.
YIBB,
David
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
the same weight. Waterline 33% longer. Seems to me (I could be wrong)
there's more boat to push underwater on the lee side of the longer
boat.
YIBB,
David
>Oh no. Not this again! That's only if you increase beam proportionally--
>and increase displacement with cube of LWL, and use a similar shape.
>Folding Schooner beam was alleged to be the same. Crew size is probably
>more significant than boat weight on these types, unless you ballast. In
>general, for similar shaped boats, whose weight relates normally to LWL,
>then of course Skene's is right. But our example is not like that.
>
>>>From Skene's Elements of Yacht Design, 8th edition on page 38. "Heeling
>>moment of wind pressure on sails varies as the cube of L.W.L." and
>>"Stability varies as the fourth power of the L.W.L." so "power to carry sail
>>increases much faster than the heeling moment" as the size of the boat
>>increases.
>>All the best;
>>Bob
>>
>
>
>
>
>Bolger rules!!!
>- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
>- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
>- Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
>- 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
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
>The Light Scooner looks cute, but she's a hot rod; even reefed downI should at that my dagger board is roughly shaped, unfinished,
>we were hitting 7-8 mph (my GPS is still set to statute) on reaches
>today.
dinged from use, misuse and misjudgement, and delaminating. My
self-designed kick up rudder is slightly better.
The Light Scooner is a fast design!
YIBB,
David
--
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
A couple of boats that are near the LS size and of traditional type
are the Chebacco and John Welsford's 6m whaler. The differences from
the LS are obvious: greater beam and freeboard, waterline beam that
is much less that the beam at the sheer. This gives something to lean
on as the boat heels and greatly lessens (to the point of very little
worry) the chance of capsize. They are not going to reach at 15 kts
as the LS is rebuted to have done, no matter what the breeze or how
terrified the skipper is, but they are better boats for general use.
Just one concept: schooner-rigged Chebacco 30.
Peter
are the Chebacco and John Welsford's 6m whaler. The differences from
the LS are obvious: greater beam and freeboard, waterline beam that
is much less that the beam at the sheer. This gives something to lean
on as the boat heels and greatly lessens (to the point of very little
worry) the chance of capsize. They are not going to reach at 15 kts
as the LS is rebuted to have done, no matter what the breeze or how
terrified the skipper is, but they are better boats for general use.
Just one concept: schooner-rigged Chebacco 30.
Peter
From Skene�s Elements of Yacht Design, 8th edition on page 38. �Heeling
moment of wind pressure on sails varies as the cube of L.W.L.� and
�Stability varies as the fourth power of the L.W.L.� so �power to carry sail
increases much faster than the heeling moment� as the size of the boat
increases.
All the best;
Bob
moment of wind pressure on sails varies as the cube of L.W.L.� and
�Stability varies as the fourth power of the L.W.L.� so �power to carry sail
increases much faster than the heeling moment� as the size of the boat
increases.
All the best;
Bob
>From: David Ryan <david@...>
>Reply-To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
>To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [bolger] Re: The Light Scooner Margaret Ellen
>Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 09:12:20 -0400
>
> >Wouldn't that give the same stability problems, if not worse for
> >singlehanding??
>
>The FS has slight less sail area on the same beam, but more length. I
>don't remember the formula, but sail-carrying ability increases with
>length, i.e. the FS is a more docile boat. It's also reported to be
>quite fast.
>
>The SHS would not be such a great choice for me; even with the board
>up, there's still the rudder to contend with. I think it might make a
>great choice for you. I've got one of PCB's little double enders, a
>Teal, and it's quite handsome. No reason to think the SHS would be
>any less so. The I60 will be double ended, but will have better shoal
>abilities than the SHS.
>
>I've said it before and I'll say it again. If I had it to do over
>again, I'd build a Birdwatcher. Easy to build and nearly perfect for
>my crew of pre-school aged daughter, water-phobic wife, and dog. The
>Light Scooner is incredibly romatic, and I love it very much. But
>it's not a very practical boat.
>
>With a bunch of folk aboard who know what do to, it's a very very
>very fun boat, and very fast.
>
>Of course it's the best looking boat in the harbor too.
>
>YIBB,
>
>David
>
>--
>
>C.E.P.
>415 W.46th Street
>New York, New York 10036
>http://www.crumblingempire.com
>Mobile (646) 325-8325
>Office (212) 247-0296
>Wouldn't that give the same stability problems, if not worse forThe FS has slight less sail area on the same beam, but more length. I
>singlehanding??
don't remember the formula, but sail-carrying ability increases with
length, i.e. the FS is a more docile boat. It's also reported to be
quite fast.
The SHS would not be such a great choice for me; even with the board
up, there's still the rudder to contend with. I think it might make a
great choice for you. I've got one of PCB's little double enders, a
Teal, and it's quite handsome. No reason to think the SHS would be
any less so. The I60 will be double ended, but will have better shoal
abilities than the SHS.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. If I had it to do over
again, I'd build a Birdwatcher. Easy to build and nearly perfect for
my crew of pre-school aged daughter, water-phobic wife, and dog. The
Light Scooner is incredibly romatic, and I love it very much. But
it's not a very practical boat.
With a bunch of folk aboard who know what do to, it's a very very
very fun boat, and very fast.
Of course it's the best looking boat in the harbor too.
YIBB,
David
--
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
I have built and sailed what was then called a "Scooner" and is now named "Light Schooner". You can single hand it in light air, but it takes three or four people to hold it down from about 10 k up (and it will fly under these circumstances). If you are looking for a beach cruiser, you might get a copy of the latest "Woodenboat" and check out the article on Birdwatcher. As is often the case with Bolger boats, the concept is perfectly logical, aesthetically unusual, and requires thinking outside the box. However, the original Birdwatcher is more or less immune to the two greatest fears of a sailor--capsize and running aground (and it also offers considerable protection against sun induced melanomas!). I think the "refined" Birdwatcher II may be a case of gilding a perfectly satisfactory lilly, but some folks may prefer it to the original.
John T
John T
----- Original Message -----
From: Philip Smith
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, June 20, 2004 1:34 AM
Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: The Light Scooner Margaret Ellen
The only other idea I
> have that would
> match these PCB boats in terms of "bang for buck" is
> to get a 2nd
> hand Hobie 16 and turn it into a camp cruiser.
>
Check out Newick's Tremolino to convert a Hobie 16
into a nice cruiser. He has plans for the conversion
and also for a newer version of the Tremolino.
Phil Smith
Bolger rules!!!
- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
- Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
- 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
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bolger/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
The only other idea I
into a nice cruiser. He has plans for the conversion
and also for a newer version of the Tremolino.
Phil Smith
> have that wouldCheck out Newick's Tremolino to convert a Hobie 16
> match these PCB boats in terms of "bang for buck" is
> to get a 2nd
> hand Hobie 16 and turn it into a camp cruiser.
>
into a nice cruiser. He has plans for the conversion
and also for a newer version of the Tremolino.
Phil Smith
Wouldn't that give the same stability problems, if not worse for
singlehanding??
singlehanding??
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Hallman <bruce@h...> wrote:
> Why not a Folding Schooner?
Hmmmmmmm I really appreciate the input from someone who has sailed
one. I don't have the thin water problem, I thought of bringing the
centre case as close to the mast step as possible both for balance
and then to use the main throat halyard to help lift the board when
arriving and departing.
Interestingly there has been wide discussion here about the utility
of flotation under the decks of small boats, the pros give your
comment about it being stable when inverted, the antis that it has
no effect till it's too late.
I know it would be smart to find something better suited to short
handed sailing, but we have just returned from 6 yrs cruising (
that's another story) and the need to rebuild the family coffers
puts me on a tight budget. The only other idea I have that would
match these PCB boats in terms of "bang for buck" is to get a 2nd
hand Hobie 16 and turn it into a camp cruiser.
Thanks again
David
one. I don't have the thin water problem, I thought of bringing the
centre case as close to the mast step as possible both for balance
and then to use the main throat halyard to help lift the board when
arriving and departing.
Interestingly there has been wide discussion here about the utility
of flotation under the decks of small boats, the pros give your
comment about it being stable when inverted, the antis that it has
no effect till it's too late.
I know it would be smart to find something better suited to short
handed sailing, but we have just returned from 6 yrs cruising (
that's another story) and the need to rebuild the family coffers
puts me on a tight budget. The only other idea I have that would
match these PCB boats in terms of "bang for buck" is to get a 2nd
hand Hobie 16 and turn it into a camp cruiser.
Thanks again
David
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, David Ryan <david@c...> wrote:
> I posited both the self-bailing cockpit and weighted
centerboard/twin
> bilge boards to PCB himself.
>
> As proposed, the self-bailing cockpit will make the boat VERY
stable
> in an inverted position. Never a desirable feature in a boat.
Where I
> live, a weighted board has as many liabilities as advantages.
(The
> singlehanded boat was designed for Socal, which has virtually no
> shoal water. Where I am it's nice not to have to lift a 125lbs
board
> every time it gets shallow.
>
> I did widen my decks. The boat can't be driven any harder as a
> result, because she doesn't sail well when heeled that far over.
At
> any rate, once the rail is down, you're likely headed for a knock
> down. Mine are just wide enough that the boat won't flood if it's
me
> and my dog, and this has been helpful more than once. Any more
weight
> than that and it's not enough. The boat swamps.
>
> On the down side, floating high like that makes capsize more
likely
> (sometimes she goes over very fast/hard, and it would be better if
> the cockpits would flood.) The wider decks make sitting down in
the
> boat less comfortable. For a variety of reasons, down in the boat
is
> the preferable position when soloing about 50% of the time. My
wider
> decks make it bad, any wider would make it nearly impossible. I'm
> considering ripping out the decks altogether (what PCP wanted to
do
> originally.) The resulting cockpits would be extremely spacious
and
> comfortable to sail out of. More likely I'll just leave them alone
> and build a boat more suitable for
singlehanding/shorthanding/going
> out in the sound.
>
> We were out today; me, wife, daughter, dog. Wind was about 12
knots.
> Even with a Newfoundland that I've trained to hike out, we had to
> douse the jib and reef the main. Started gusting 15+ and we had to
> head in.
>
> The Light Scooner looks cute, but she's a hot rod; even reefed
down
> we were hitting 7-8 mph (my GPS is still set to statute) on
reaches
> today. In exchange she's not a very safe boat. Not particularly
> unsafe, but she'll punish errors in judgement with time in the
water.
> I'm on a first name basis with the local Coast Guard Commander.
>
> YIBB,
>
> David
>
>
Why not a Folding Schooner?
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Jason Stancil" <jasonstancil@h...>
wrote:
want the speed.
wrote:
> Dang, you've guys have got me afraid of the light schooner, remindI've just never been able to like a boat pointed at both ends, and I
> me not to get in one of those. Seriously, from what i've heard
> sounds like the his and hers/single handed schooner is the ticket.
> Jason
want the speed.
Dang, you've guys have got me afraid of the light schooner, remind
me not to get in one of those. Seriously, from what i've heard
sounds like the his and hers/single handed schooner is the ticket.
Jason
me not to get in one of those. Seriously, from what i've heard
sounds like the his and hers/single handed schooner is the ticket.
Jason
I posited both the self-bailing cockpit and weighted centerboard/twin
bilge boards to PCB himself.
As proposed, the self-bailing cockpit will make the boat VERY stable
in an inverted position. Never a desirable feature in a boat. Where I
live, a weighted board has as many liabilities as advantages. (The
singlehanded boat was designed for Socal, which has virtually no
shoal water. Where I am it's nice not to have to lift a 125lbs board
every time it gets shallow.
I did widen my decks. The boat can't be driven any harder as a
result, because she doesn't sail well when heeled that far over. At
any rate, once the rail is down, you're likely headed for a knock
down. Mine are just wide enough that the boat won't flood if it's me
and my dog, and this has been helpful more than once. Any more weight
than that and it's not enough. The boat swamps.
On the down side, floating high like that makes capsize more likely
(sometimes she goes over very fast/hard, and it would be better if
the cockpits would flood.) The wider decks make sitting down in the
boat less comfortable. For a variety of reasons, down in the boat is
the preferable position when soloing about 50% of the time. My wider
decks make it bad, any wider would make it nearly impossible. I'm
considering ripping out the decks altogether (what PCP wanted to do
originally.) The resulting cockpits would be extremely spacious and
comfortable to sail out of. More likely I'll just leave them alone
and build a boat more suitable for singlehanding/shorthanding/going
out in the sound.
We were out today; me, wife, daughter, dog. Wind was about 12 knots.
Even with a Newfoundland that I've trained to hike out, we had to
douse the jib and reef the main. Started gusting 15+ and we had to
head in.
The Light Scooner looks cute, but she's a hot rod; even reefed down
we were hitting 7-8 mph (my GPS is still set to statute) on reaches
today. In exchange she's not a very safe boat. Not particularly
unsafe, but she'll punish errors in judgement with time in the water.
I'm on a first name basis with the local Coast Guard Commander.
YIBB,
David
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
bilge boards to PCB himself.
As proposed, the self-bailing cockpit will make the boat VERY stable
in an inverted position. Never a desirable feature in a boat. Where I
live, a weighted board has as many liabilities as advantages. (The
singlehanded boat was designed for Socal, which has virtually no
shoal water. Where I am it's nice not to have to lift a 125lbs board
every time it gets shallow.
I did widen my decks. The boat can't be driven any harder as a
result, because she doesn't sail well when heeled that far over. At
any rate, once the rail is down, you're likely headed for a knock
down. Mine are just wide enough that the boat won't flood if it's me
and my dog, and this has been helpful more than once. Any more weight
than that and it's not enough. The boat swamps.
On the down side, floating high like that makes capsize more likely
(sometimes she goes over very fast/hard, and it would be better if
the cockpits would flood.) The wider decks make sitting down in the
boat less comfortable. For a variety of reasons, down in the boat is
the preferable position when soloing about 50% of the time. My wider
decks make it bad, any wider would make it nearly impossible. I'm
considering ripping out the decks altogether (what PCP wanted to do
originally.) The resulting cockpits would be extremely spacious and
comfortable to sail out of. More likely I'll just leave them alone
and build a boat more suitable for singlehanding/shorthanding/going
out in the sound.
We were out today; me, wife, daughter, dog. Wind was about 12 knots.
Even with a Newfoundland that I've trained to hike out, we had to
douse the jib and reef the main. Started gusting 15+ and we had to
head in.
The Light Scooner looks cute, but she's a hot rod; even reefed down
we were hitting 7-8 mph (my GPS is still set to statute) on reaches
today. In exchange she's not a very safe boat. Not particularly
unsafe, but she'll punish errors in judgement with time in the water.
I'm on a first name basis with the local Coast Guard Commander.
YIBB,
David
>Here's what I'm thinking.--
>
>1) Enclose forward aft and centre a la carlsson
>2) cover forward cockpit to keep water out, sunbrella or 1/4 inch
>ply hatch made to look like a cute cabin
>3)I could make the sidedecks wider, maybe not necessary
>4 I could put in a false floor in the cokpit and make it self
>draining.
>
>Any or all of these would make the boat better able to handle water
>coming over the deck, maybe 1& 2 would be enough, but none of these
>measures should screw with the design significantly.
>
>Then the issue of stability i.e. sailing short handed/single handed
>
>In 30 odd boats the H& H schooner is shown to have a centreboard
>with 100 lbs of lead in it, he says "she should pop right back up
>from a knockdown". Why not do something similar with the light
>schooner? Have to beef up the case to take the extra load, might
>need more than 100lbs because or greater sail area. The board is off
>centre- is that a big deal? I'm thinking to build two boards, one
>standard, one with 125-150lbs of lead at the bottom. I would have a
>cruising configuration and a racing configuration.
>
>comments anyone?
>
>
>
>
>Bolger rules!!!
>- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
>- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
>- Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
>- 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
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
PS What's the I 60?
I'm in NZ , bolger is practically unheard of here
I'm in NZ , bolger is practically unheard of here
Here's what I'm thinking.
1) Enclose forward aft and centre a la carlsson
2) cover forward cockpit to keep water out, sunbrella or 1/4 inch
ply hatch made to look like a cute cabin
3)I could make the sidedecks wider, maybe not necessary
4 I could put in a false floor in the cokpit and make it self
draining.
Any or all of these would make the boat better able to handle water
coming over the deck, maybe 1& 2 would be enough, but none of these
measures should screw with the design significantly.
Then the issue of stability i.e. sailing short handed/single handed
In 30 odd boats the H& H schooner is shown to have a centreboard
with 100 lbs of lead in it, he says "she should pop right back up
from a knockdown". Why not do something similar with the light
schooner? Have to beef up the case to take the extra load, might
need more than 100lbs because or greater sail area. The board is off
centre- is that a big deal? I'm thinking to build two boards, one
standard, one with 125-150lbs of lead at the bottom. I would have a
cruising configuration and a racing configuration.
comments anyone?
1) Enclose forward aft and centre a la carlsson
2) cover forward cockpit to keep water out, sunbrella or 1/4 inch
ply hatch made to look like a cute cabin
3)I could make the sidedecks wider, maybe not necessary
4 I could put in a false floor in the cokpit and make it self
draining.
Any or all of these would make the boat better able to handle water
coming over the deck, maybe 1& 2 would be enough, but none of these
measures should screw with the design significantly.
Then the issue of stability i.e. sailing short handed/single handed
In 30 odd boats the H& H schooner is shown to have a centreboard
with 100 lbs of lead in it, he says "she should pop right back up
from a knockdown". Why not do something similar with the light
schooner? Have to beef up the case to take the extra load, might
need more than 100lbs because or greater sail area. The board is off
centre- is that a big deal? I'm thinking to build two boards, one
standard, one with 125-150lbs of lead at the bottom. I would have a
cruising configuration and a racing configuration.
comments anyone?
>> On the otherWhat's more - we were sailing her as a cat-ketch! No jib, my old
>> hand, I've GPS'd her at 4 knots in so little wind there
>> was barely a
>> ripple on the water.
>
>You shouldn't sail in the Race when there is so little wind!
slightly oversized foresail, and a cut up mainsail off a Hershoff 12
1/2... and we had the Teal Lil'Winnie in tow!
I fairness, we were in the South end of the lake, which is pretty
smooth even when the shorebreeze is gusting. But on the day in
question I'm sure that the winds were 8k or less!
YIBB,
David
--
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
> On the otherYou shouldn't sail in the Race when there is so little wind!
> hand, I've GPS'd her at 4 knots in so little wind there
> was barely a
> ripple on the water.
Peter
Seriously, I love my Light Scooner. Of Bolger's little schooner, I
think she's the most beautiful (it's the clipper bow and sprit!) But
she's a terrible, Terrible, TERRIBLE singlehanded boat. It's not the
arrangement of the lines; it's the huge amount of sail area on a four
foot beam. When I was out yesterday I don't thing the winds ever got
above 12 knots, but I was right on the edge of being overpowered. I
would have done much better with three aboard. If I wasn't planning
to undertake the I60 (If PCB&F ever finish the design!) I'd build
either the Singlehanded Schooner or the Birdwatcher, and leave the
Light Scooner for when I could wrangle up 3-4 additional crew. I've
been knocked down with nine (9!) adults sitting on the weather rail -
six of them with their legs over the side, and over we went anyways!
The Light Scooner is a seriously over powered boat! (On the other
hand, I've GPS'd her at 4 knots in so little wind there was barely a
ripple on the water. Who knew ghosting could be so much fun!)
Build the Light Scooner, but plan on building another boat too. You'll need it!
YIBB,
David
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
think she's the most beautiful (it's the clipper bow and sprit!) But
she's a terrible, Terrible, TERRIBLE singlehanded boat. It's not the
arrangement of the lines; it's the huge amount of sail area on a four
foot beam. When I was out yesterday I don't thing the winds ever got
above 12 knots, but I was right on the edge of being overpowered. I
would have done much better with three aboard. If I wasn't planning
to undertake the I60 (If PCB&F ever finish the design!) I'd build
either the Singlehanded Schooner or the Birdwatcher, and leave the
Light Scooner for when I could wrangle up 3-4 additional crew. I've
been knocked down with nine (9!) adults sitting on the weather rail -
six of them with their legs over the side, and over we went anyways!
The Light Scooner is a seriously over powered boat! (On the other
hand, I've GPS'd her at 4 knots in so little wind there was barely a
ripple on the water. Who knew ghosting could be so much fun!)
Build the Light Scooner, but plan on building another boat too. You'll need it!
YIBB,
David
>----
>Stop being so damned optimistic
>
>
>
>- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, David Ryan <david@c...> wrote:
>> You'll regret it!!!!
>>
>>
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
--
Stop being so damned optimistic
- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, David Ryan <david@c...> wrote:
Stop being so damned optimistic
- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, David Ryan <david@c...> wrote:
> You'll regret it!!!!
>
>
You'll regret it!!!!
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
>Yowee--
>
>I'm waiting for plans to start building. Eveybody says it can't be
>singlehanded but that's what I'll be doing on many occaisions. Tell
>me more.
>Difficult is OK, but impossible can be a bitch
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
Yowee
I'm waiting for plans to start building. Eveybody says it can't be
singlehanded but that's what I'll be doing on many occaisions. Tell
me more.
Difficult is OK, but impossible can be a bitch
David
I'm waiting for plans to start building. Eveybody says it can't be
singlehanded but that's what I'll be doing on many occaisions. Tell
me more.
Difficult is OK, but impossible can be a bitch
David
Well, she's back where she belongs - swinging off a block of concrete
in the South end of Lake Montauk.
My she looks fine, riding anchor with her newly varnished masts. The
white tips are a nice touch! Combine that with the Sailright sails I
bought from that fellow who burned the Allison Mite, and I'm sure she
made quite a sight ghosting out of the fog today. (I got lost in it,
and with the shifting wind suspect I may have actually sailed in a
circle.)
The new sheeting arrangement is much better, especially for
singlehanding (though she's still a lousy singlehander.) When you sit
on the bottom and scan around through the web of spars, sheet and
halyards, you feel like you're on the Bluenose.
We finally got a digital camera, and my wife is confident enough in
our Gull that we should get some nice shots this year. Now if I can
just find some people to sail with; my daughter Margaret Ellen is
still under 50 pounds!
YIBB,
David
--
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
in the South end of Lake Montauk.
My she looks fine, riding anchor with her newly varnished masts. The
white tips are a nice touch! Combine that with the Sailright sails I
bought from that fellow who burned the Allison Mite, and I'm sure she
made quite a sight ghosting out of the fog today. (I got lost in it,
and with the shifting wind suspect I may have actually sailed in a
circle.)
The new sheeting arrangement is much better, especially for
singlehanding (though she's still a lousy singlehander.) When you sit
on the bottom and scan around through the web of spars, sheet and
halyards, you feel like you're on the Bluenose.
We finally got a digital camera, and my wife is confident enough in
our Gull that we should get some nice shots this year. Now if I can
just find some people to sail with; my daughter Margaret Ellen is
still under 50 pounds!
YIBB,
David
--
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296