Re: PCB article about scaling plans?
You might look into using the hull of Centennial II. It about 24 ft.
The designed leeboards (lee keels?) are ugly and troublesome, and the
rig is not that good, and the performance is supposedly poor, but if
you are changing everything, maybe it will work. An open boat with a
ballast keel needs flotation, of course.
PCB has designed a three or four boats for Outward Bound-type
programs. Maybe one of them would work for you.
The designed leeboards (lee keels?) are ugly and troublesome, and the
rig is not that good, and the performance is supposedly poor, but if
you are changing everything, maybe it will work. An open boat with a
ballast keel needs flotation, of course.
PCB has designed a three or four boats for Outward Bound-type
programs. Maybe one of them would work for you.
Joe Cronley wrote:
dimensions and bevels given on the plans for the expanded panels. At
that point, you are back to lofting, cut and fit, and/or other ways to
get the panel shapes.
> scaling plans up or downAs soon as you start scaling you lose the convenience of the
dimensions and bevels given on the plans for the expanded panels. At
that point, you are back to lofting, cut and fit, and/or other ways to
get the panel shapes.
In the archives I once found an article by PCB that was originally
published, I believe, in MAIB. It regarded specifics of scaling plans up or
down by modest percentages. Would anyone recall this, have this, or be able
to direct me to where to find it?
Now that I have my SHS plans, courtesy of lister Bill Derby, I can begin the
process of studying whether it could be expanded a bit to accomodate my four
boys. I would also build a no-cockpit open configuration, with heavy
structure around maststeps a la Light Schooner, and a small foredeck.
I realize that I open myself to "look at a bigger boat," "don't mess with
the plans," "what's wrong with light schooner if you want bigger?" type
comments, which I will take with all good humor.
I love the size of light schooner but the quarter and transom is just ugly.
Badly needs some taper, tumblehome, something, which is beyond my
capability. Perhaps it's a physical issue of working in plywood. Double
ended is so much more elegant.
Joe Cronley
678-352-8983
cel 404-295-5712
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
published, I believe, in MAIB. It regarded specifics of scaling plans up or
down by modest percentages. Would anyone recall this, have this, or be able
to direct me to where to find it?
Now that I have my SHS plans, courtesy of lister Bill Derby, I can begin the
process of studying whether it could be expanded a bit to accomodate my four
boys. I would also build a no-cockpit open configuration, with heavy
structure around maststeps a la Light Schooner, and a small foredeck.
I realize that I open myself to "look at a bigger boat," "don't mess with
the plans," "what's wrong with light schooner if you want bigger?" type
comments, which I will take with all good humor.
I love the size of light schooner but the quarter and transom is just ugly.
Badly needs some taper, tumblehome, something, which is beyond my
capability. Perhaps it's a physical issue of working in plywood. Double
ended is so much more elegant.
Joe Cronley
678-352-8983
cel 404-295-5712
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]