Re: design changes
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Bob Larkin <boblark@p...> wrote:
I agree with you 100%. Having built cedar strip canoes I understand
the engineering concept. My point is that if one decides on the
minimalist route, which Bolger himself favors, I would still consider
it worthwhile to get the BW2 plans and not BW1. I would also consider
it safe to sail without the foam cored construction and using thicker
plywood.
I already have BW1 plans and still would get BW2 plans for the
reasons already given. I could build a BW1 and modify it in some ways
and foam core it as well, but that pinky stern treatment is beyond me
without the plans as well as several other features that I find
desirable
Anybody interested in BW1 plans? Cheeep!
Cheers, Nels (Member of the semi-minimalistic group.)
> Hi Nels,1/8
>
> Don't forget that the BW2 type of panels serve also as structural
> elements. I'm now looking at a "test" sandwich consisting of two
> pieces of ply with 1-inch foam bonded in between. It is incrediblystrong,
> compared to the ply. This, of course, is an ancient concept,applied to
> everything from I-beams to cored decks.Hi Bob,
I agree with you 100%. Having built cedar strip canoes I understand
the engineering concept. My point is that if one decides on the
minimalist route, which Bolger himself favors, I would still consider
it worthwhile to get the BW2 plans and not BW1. I would also consider
it safe to sail without the foam cored construction and using thicker
plywood.
I already have BW1 plans and still would get BW2 plans for the
reasons already given. I could build a BW1 and modify it in some ways
and foam core it as well, but that pinky stern treatment is beyond me
without the plans as well as several other features that I find
desirable
Anybody interested in BW1 plans? Cheeep!
Cheers, Nels (Member of the semi-minimalistic group.)
> Don't forget that the BW2 type of panelsI think one of the coolest Bolgerisms of BW2
it that the insulation panels on the bottom of the
boat are held back from the sides of the boat
leaving a gap which acts as a gutter. Spills and
leaks collect in the gutter, instead of making a
mess of all your other gear or the seat of your pants
located at the lowpoint of the boat.
After reading Bob's note, I think I will foam, then finish. The sun off the
water on that imaginery first sail blinded me to the structural realities of
sandwich construction. Besides, I don't think it will take much more time
than not, and it will allow the gung ho attitude to be more comfortable.
David
http://us.click.yahoo.com/5iY7fA/6WnJAA/Y3ZIAA/_0TolB/TM
water on that imaginery first sail blinded me to the structural realities of
sandwich construction. Besides, I don't think it will take much more time
than not, and it will allow the gung ho attitude to be more comfortable.
David
http://us.click.yahoo.com/5iY7fA/6WnJAA/Y3ZIAA/_0TolB/TM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------~->(978) 282-1349
>
> 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:
> - Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> - Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Nells wrote:
I would strongly suggest that no matter which approach you prefer,
that you get the BWII plans.
I would second that . To my eyes the hull shapes of 1 & 2 are the same, but
there may be some slight tweeking or refinement beyond my untrained eyes.As
Nels mentioned, the off-center board (Bolgers name for it) is longer, as
well as ballasted with a 100 lb. steel plate inside, allowing it to carry
the Solent rig with running bowsprit, larger still than the BW1 with jib. So
after reading Mr. Bolger's account of lake sailing the original, saying she
was very fast, and Mr Precht's accounts of his Airex/fiberglass version, I
am very anxious to see what my BW2 will do.Also, the steering system seems
much improved. Less prone to slop and a larger range of rudder swing.
Limited tiller swing was a small criticism of the first one.
Nels, you have A really interesting point. I hadn't considered finishing
before foaming. That could get the boat finished before the kid's spring
break.
Thank you, David
I would strongly suggest that no matter which approach you prefer,
that you get the BWII plans.
I would second that . To my eyes the hull shapes of 1 & 2 are the same, but
there may be some slight tweeking or refinement beyond my untrained eyes.As
Nels mentioned, the off-center board (Bolgers name for it) is longer, as
well as ballasted with a 100 lb. steel plate inside, allowing it to carry
the Solent rig with running bowsprit, larger still than the BW1 with jib. So
after reading Mr. Bolger's account of lake sailing the original, saying she
was very fast, and Mr Precht's accounts of his Airex/fiberglass version, I
am very anxious to see what my BW2 will do.Also, the steering system seems
much improved. Less prone to slop and a larger range of rudder swing.
Limited tiller swing was a small criticism of the first one.
Nels, you have A really interesting point. I hadn't considered finishing
before foaming. That could get the boat finished before the kid's spring
break.
Thank you, David
Hi Nels,
Don't forget that the BW2 type of panels serve also as structural
elements. I'm now looking at a "test" sandwich consisting of two 1/8
pieces of ply with 1-inch foam bonded in between. It is incredibly strong,
compared to the ply. This, of course, is an ancient concept, applied to
everything from I-beams to cored decks. I mention this, because to get the
full strength, it is important that the compression side of the sandwich
cannot buckle. Bonding the foam to the skins is important here.
Another element is the ability to hole the outer skin and still not let
water in. This again requires that the inner skin be sealed to water.
On my BW2 I plan to bond the foam and seal the inner skin. As, has been
discussed here before, this adds a need to avoid voids.
BTW, I have finished up a couple of competing projects, and am now busy
building frames, etc. for BW2.
Bob Larkin
Corvallis, OR
At 11:08 PM 2/13/2005, you wrote:
Don't forget that the BW2 type of panels serve also as structural
elements. I'm now looking at a "test" sandwich consisting of two 1/8
pieces of ply with 1-inch foam bonded in between. It is incredibly strong,
compared to the ply. This, of course, is an ancient concept, applied to
everything from I-beams to cored decks. I mention this, because to get the
full strength, it is important that the compression side of the sandwich
cannot buckle. Bonding the foam to the skins is important here.
Another element is the ability to hole the outer skin and still not let
water in. This again requires that the inner skin be sealed to water.
On my BW2 I plan to bond the foam and seal the inner skin. As, has been
discussed here before, this adds a need to avoid voids.
BTW, I have finished up a couple of competing projects, and am now busy
building frames, etc. for BW2.
Bob Larkin
Corvallis, OR
At 11:08 PM 2/13/2005, you wrote:
>If I build a BW2 I would
>probably just leave out the foam and liner altogether the first year.
>Would be no different than BW1. That would give me the opportunity to
>evaluate the condensation potential and decide where I wanted to run
>wiring and other stuff inside the hull. My next plan might be to
>install the foam to the liner and then have it in sections and
>removable. Leave a ventilation space at the bottom and next to the
>hul, for any condensation to collect that might run down off the
>inner hull surface.
>
>There are thousands of plywood boats out there and I bet less than 5%
>are insulated or have that much extra floatation. very few could be
>layed down 90 degrees without shipping any water. So this is a belt
>ans suspenders design <snip>
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Gene T." <goldranger02-boats@y...>
wrote:
that you get the BWII plans. That gives you the option to build it
minamilistic and add later if you choose to. Having that great little
motor location, the wet wells, the larger C/B , rounded bow fillers,
fancier hatch options, are much easier to add to it later than trying
to add them to a BWI.
Cheers, Nels
wrote:
> David,I would strongly suggest that no matter which approach you prefer,
> In reading the couple articles about BWII I was very
> much under the impression that Mr. Bolger felt that
> people would choose between BWI and BWII on a feature
> by feature basis. BWI is a minimalist boat and BWII
> has many features.
that you get the BWII plans. That gives you the option to build it
minamilistic and add later if you choose to. Having that great little
motor location, the wet wells, the larger C/B , rounded bow fillers,
fancier hatch options, are much easier to add to it later than trying
to add them to a BWI.
Cheers, Nels
David,
In reading the couple articles about BWII I was very
much under the impression that Mr. Bolger felt that
people would choose between BWI and BWII on a feature
by feature basis. BWI is a minimalist boat and BWII
has many features.
I believe you may have triggered the flow of old posts
but I don't think they were much about you and your
plans.
Sincerely,
Gene T.
--- Lipsey <saillips@...> wrote:
In reading the couple articles about BWII I was very
much under the impression that Mr. Bolger felt that
people would choose between BWI and BWII on a feature
by feature basis. BWI is a minimalist boat and BWII
has many features.
I believe you may have triggered the flow of old posts
but I don't think they were much about you and your
plans.
Sincerely,
Gene T.
--- Lipsey <saillips@...> wrote:
>http://us.click.yahoo.com/9hSKEA/fV0JAA/Y3ZIAA/_0TolB/TM
> Hello all,
> I'm not quite sure if this thread about design
> changes is a "general"
> conversation, or is in response to my slight
> variation from the plans I
> received. As I have said here, at least three times,
> I had no idea ,based on
> the Wooden Boat article, that BW2 was so very
> different and more complex
> than BW1. I thought the hull structure would be the
> same, and so could use
> materials I had on hand to build it. I have always
> followed the plans when I
> constructed the other four boats I have built. I
> would adamently encourage
> anyone else to do the same. In my current BW2
> project, I was IN NO WAY
> trying to second guess, or improve upon Mr Bolger's
> fine work. Even though
> this is my third Bolger boat ( the fifth boat I have
> constructed), and I
> have owned and sailed a Cal 20, a Mirage 18 swing
> keel, and a Catalina 22
> swing keel, and in general been "messing about"
> since age 14 (32 years), I
> still consider myself to be just like the guy who
> knows just enough Karate
> to go out and get his butt kicked really good!
> Had I done something like lengthen the design by six
> feet, or tried to build
> it as a bilge keeled boat, or rig it as a three
> masted schooner, then I'd
> deserved to be flogged.
> If someone buys plans, yet wants something
> different, then they should
> buy different plans, design it themselves (and take
> full reponsibility for
> the outcome), or work with the designer to come up
> with a plan that fits
> their wants and needs. Again let me repeat that I
> was not second guessing or
> tryng to approve upon Mr Bolger's work.
> Thanks, David
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> --------------------~-->
> Meet the McDonald�s� Lincoln Fry get free digital
> souvenirs,
> Web-only video and bid on the Lincoln Fry prop
> charity auction.
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
>
> 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
>
>
>bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Lipsey" <saillips@c...> wrote:
On my part it was to offer encouragement but also to point out that
there are areas where one should enquire before making major
adjustments.
When it comes to scantlings and ply thickness etc. PCB&F are very
flexible. On several plans they state, and I paraphrase here.
"If you use heavier thicknesses your boat will be heavier and
probably stronger. You will perhaps not have to reef as early and the
light air performance may be effected."
,
With BW2 I believe his goal was to stay near 1000 pounds all-up
weight but I would use 3/8 plywood myself. If I build a BW2 I would
probably just leave out the foam and liner altogether the first year.
Would be no different than BW1. That would give me the opportunity to
evaluate the condensation potential and decide where I wanted to run
wiring and other stuff inside the hull. My next plan might be to
install the foam to the liner and then have it in sections and
removable. Leave a ventilation space at the bottom and next to the
hul, for any condensation to collect that might run down off the
inner hull surface.
There are thousands of plywood boats out there and I bet less than 5%
are insulated or have that much extra floatation. very few could be
layed down 90 degrees without shipping any water. So this is a belt
ans suspenders design with every possibility addressed, including
sails, motor, oars, adequate ventilation, insulation, able to recover
from a knockdown quickly and good sailing qualities, extreme shallow
draft. In extended mosit conditions I would have a source of heat to
run awhile with the vents open. This might even be a small solar
powered fan or anelectic heater when parked in the driveway.
Just don't decide to put leeboards on it and a chinese junk schooner
rig I would suggest. Or maybe write and ask them and then post their
response here!
Cheers, Nels
> Hello all,a "general"
> I'm not quite sure if this thread about design changes is
> conversation, or is in response to my slight variation from theplans I
> received.Hi David,
On my part it was to offer encouragement but also to point out that
there are areas where one should enquire before making major
adjustments.
When it comes to scantlings and ply thickness etc. PCB&F are very
flexible. On several plans they state, and I paraphrase here.
"If you use heavier thicknesses your boat will be heavier and
probably stronger. You will perhaps not have to reef as early and the
light air performance may be effected."
,
With BW2 I believe his goal was to stay near 1000 pounds all-up
weight but I would use 3/8 plywood myself. If I build a BW2 I would
probably just leave out the foam and liner altogether the first year.
Would be no different than BW1. That would give me the opportunity to
evaluate the condensation potential and decide where I wanted to run
wiring and other stuff inside the hull. My next plan might be to
install the foam to the liner and then have it in sections and
removable. Leave a ventilation space at the bottom and next to the
hul, for any condensation to collect that might run down off the
inner hull surface.
There are thousands of plywood boats out there and I bet less than 5%
are insulated or have that much extra floatation. very few could be
layed down 90 degrees without shipping any water. So this is a belt
ans suspenders design with every possibility addressed, including
sails, motor, oars, adequate ventilation, insulation, able to recover
from a knockdown quickly and good sailing qualities, extreme shallow
draft. In extended mosit conditions I would have a source of heat to
run awhile with the vents open. This might even be a small solar
powered fan or anelectic heater when parked in the driveway.
Just don't decide to put leeboards on it and a chinese junk schooner
rig I would suggest. Or maybe write and ask them and then post their
response here!
Cheers, Nels
Hello all,
I'm not quite sure if this thread about design changes is a "general"
conversation, or is in response to my slight variation from the plans I
received. As I have said here, at least three times, I had no idea ,based on
the Wooden Boat article, that BW2 was so very different and more complex
than BW1. I thought the hull structure would be the same, and so could use
materials I had on hand to build it. I have always followed the plans when I
constructed the other four boats I have built. I would adamently encourage
anyone else to do the same. In my current BW2 project, I was IN NO WAY
trying to second guess, or improve upon Mr Bolger's fine work. Even though
this is my third Bolger boat ( the fifth boat I have constructed), and I
have owned and sailed a Cal 20, a Mirage 18 swing keel, and a Catalina 22
swing keel, and in general been "messing about" since age 14 (32 years), I
still consider myself to be just like the guy who knows just enough Karate
to go out and get his butt kicked really good!
Had I done something like lengthen the design by six feet, or tried to build
it as a bilge keeled boat, or rig it as a three masted schooner, then I'd
deserved to be flogged.
If someone buys plans, yet wants something different, then they should
buy different plans, design it themselves (and take full reponsibility for
the outcome), or work with the designer to come up with a plan that fits
their wants and needs. Again let me repeat that I was not second guessing or
tryng to approve upon Mr Bolger's work.
Thanks, David
I'm not quite sure if this thread about design changes is a "general"
conversation, or is in response to my slight variation from the plans I
received. As I have said here, at least three times, I had no idea ,based on
the Wooden Boat article, that BW2 was so very different and more complex
than BW1. I thought the hull structure would be the same, and so could use
materials I had on hand to build it. I have always followed the plans when I
constructed the other four boats I have built. I would adamently encourage
anyone else to do the same. In my current BW2 project, I was IN NO WAY
trying to second guess, or improve upon Mr Bolger's fine work. Even though
this is my third Bolger boat ( the fifth boat I have constructed), and I
have owned and sailed a Cal 20, a Mirage 18 swing keel, and a Catalina 22
swing keel, and in general been "messing about" since age 14 (32 years), I
still consider myself to be just like the guy who knows just enough Karate
to go out and get his butt kicked really good!
Had I done something like lengthen the design by six feet, or tried to build
it as a bilge keeled boat, or rig it as a three masted schooner, then I'd
deserved to be flogged.
If someone buys plans, yet wants something different, then they should
buy different plans, design it themselves (and take full reponsibility for
the outcome), or work with the designer to come up with a plan that fits
their wants and needs. Again let me repeat that I was not second guessing or
tryng to approve upon Mr Bolger's work.
Thanks, David