Re: Design 613, Paddling Skiff
This design reminds of the divergent opinions on Eeek! and the 12'
Pirogue (Peero) as to what might be considered good and what might be
not much of a boat, & etc. Yes, sinking the transom won't apply to
Eeek!, which with its pointy stern can accept a wide range of loading,
but that isn't the point - clearly Paddling Skiff has a specific load
in mind. More to the point is height. I'm not exactly sure of the
topsides height for Padddling Skiff, but from Bruce's depiction it
would seem greater than that of Peero.
A large part in PCB at one point saying that Peero was better than
Eeek! was, relatively, the quite low height of the sides that allowed
for acceptable use of a double paddle in Peero, but not in Eeek!
As Paddling Skiff was designed for paddling by small, quickly out-
growing children, the query arises as to why the topsides height was
not as low as that of Peero; nor as meant for little kids, then
relatively lower again?
Graeme
Pirogue (Peero) as to what might be considered good and what might be
not much of a boat, & etc. Yes, sinking the transom won't apply to
Eeek!, which with its pointy stern can accept a wide range of loading,
but that isn't the point - clearly Paddling Skiff has a specific load
in mind. More to the point is height. I'm not exactly sure of the
topsides height for Padddling Skiff, but from Bruce's depiction it
would seem greater than that of Peero.
A large part in PCB at one point saying that Peero was better than
Eeek! was, relatively, the quite low height of the sides that allowed
for acceptable use of a double paddle in Peero, but not in Eeek!
As Paddling Skiff was designed for paddling by small, quickly out-
growing children, the query arises as to why the topsides height was
not as low as that of Peero; nor as meant for little kids, then
relatively lower again?
Graeme
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Bruce Hallman" <bruce@...> wrote:
>
> > This trade-off makes me wonder if it actually makes sense to
> > add enough rocker to get the transom completely out of the
> > water? Obviously Bolger doesn't think so in this case ...
>
> Actually, Bolger's waterline is drawn for two children, at 160 lbs. I
> modeled it in FreeShip because I wanted to get a better visualization
> of the 3D shape of the hull and also because I was trying to evaluate
> what it would be like if the boat was floating me personally, hence
> the 200 pound waterline. It *is* a very small boat, and dragging a
> inch or two of the transom would not cause a crisis I think.
>
> This trade-off makes me wonder if it actually makes sense toActually, Bolger's waterline is drawn for two children, at 160 lbs. I
> add enough rocker to get the transom completely out of the
> water? Obviously Bolger doesn't think so in this case ...
modeled it in FreeShip because I wanted to get a better visualization
of the 3D shape of the hull and also because I was trying to evaluate
what it would be like if the boat was floating me personally, hence
the 200 pound waterline. It *is* a very small boat, and dragging a
inch or two of the transom would not cause a crisis I think.
ON my boat Wolftrap, Bolger seemed to think that that the bottom unstead
iof being v'd with deadrise offered less drag if that vee was rolled up
in a curve. I guess that made the amount of transom in the water very
small. The amount of rocker was minamal. being only a few inches in 26ft.
Doug
Kenneth Grome wrote:
iof being v'd with deadrise offered less drag if that vee was rolled up
in a curve. I guess that made the amount of transom in the water very
small. The amount of rocker was minamal. being only a few inches in 26ft.
Doug
Kenneth Grome wrote:
>
> The transom is below the waterline so it will drag when
> paddled, yet the boat still has a lot of rocker so it
> cannot benefit from having a straighter bottom that is
> often easier to propel.
>
> In another forum some of us were debating the value of
> designing with more rocker (in an effort to get the transom
> above the waterline) vs. keeping the bottom straighter for
> easier propulsion.
>
> This trade-off makes me wonder if it actually makes sense to
> add enough rocker to get the transom completely out of the
> water? Obviously Bolger doesn't think so in this case ...
>
> Sincerely,
> Ken Grome
> Bagacay Boatworks
> www.bagacayboatworks.com
>
> > I was just looking at my old pile of MAIB's (15Mar94) and
> > discovered a 'classic' Bolger Instant-Boat design with
> > which I was not familiar. 7'6" by 2'0", a simple
> > "Paddling Skiff" canoe like boat, buildable in a weekend,
> > the smallest in the Advanced Sharpie series I think.
> > Made out of about 1 and a half sheets of 1/4" plywood,
> > weighing about 40 lbs. The waterline shown in the
> > isometric is 200lbs.
> >
> >http://www.flickr.com/photos/hallman/2724590489/
> <http://www.flickr.com/photos/hallman/2724590489/>
>
>
Hi Ken,
On which forum were such discussions?
I will be very interested to go there and read such different opinions.
As my personal opinion, by looking at different classic hull shapes I found that the most logic shape is the way how Atkin was thinking. A deep v shaped stem and then a straight line from about 1/4 or 2/3 of the lenght from the stem to the transom that is just at the W.L..
If you can not tell about other forums on this one please send message directly to me.
ggboat1@...
Giuliano
On which forum were such discussions?
I will be very interested to go there and read such different opinions.
As my personal opinion, by looking at different classic hull shapes I found that the most logic shape is the way how Atkin was thinking. A deep v shaped stem and then a straight line from about 1/4 or 2/3 of the lenght from the stem to the transom that is just at the W.L..
If you can not tell about other forums on this one please send message directly to me.
ggboat1@...
Giuliano
--- On Sun, 8/3/08, Kenneth Grome <bagacayboatworks@...> wrote:
From: Kenneth Grome <bagacayboatworks@...>
Subject: Re: [bolger] Design 613, Paddling Skiff
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, August 3, 2008, 3:09 AM
The transom is below the waterline so it will drag when
paddled, yet the boat still has a lot of rocker so it
cannot benefit from having a straighter bottom that is
often easier to propel.
In another forum some of us were debating the value of
designing with more rocker (in an effort to get the transom
above the waterline) vs. keeping the bottom straighter for
easier propulsion.
This trade-off makes me wonder if it actually makes sense to
add enough rocker to get the transom completely out of the
water? Obviously Bolger doesn't think so in this case ...
Sincerely,
Ken Grome
Bagacay Boatworks
www.bagacayboatwork s.com
> I was just looking at my old pile of MAIB's (15Mar94) and
> discovered a 'classic' Bolger Instant-Boat design with
> which I was not familiar. 7'6" by 2'0", a simple
> "Paddling Skiff" canoe like boat, buildable in a weekend,
> the smallest in the Advanced Sharpie series I think.
> Made out of about 1 and a half sheets of 1/4" plywood,
> weighing about 40 lbs. The waterline shown in the
> isometric is 200lbs.
>
>http://www.flickrcom/photos/ hallman/27245904 89/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
The transom is below the waterline so it will drag when
paddled, yet the boat still has a lot of rocker so it
cannot benefit from having a straighter bottom that is
often easier to propel.
In another forum some of us were debating the value of
designing with more rocker (in an effort to get the transom
above the waterline) vs. keeping the bottom straighter for
easier propulsion.
This trade-off makes me wonder if it actually makes sense to
add enough rocker to get the transom completely out of the
water? Obviously Bolger doesn't think so in this case ...
Sincerely,
Ken Grome
Bagacay Boatworks
www.bagacayboatworks.com
paddled, yet the boat still has a lot of rocker so it
cannot benefit from having a straighter bottom that is
often easier to propel.
In another forum some of us were debating the value of
designing with more rocker (in an effort to get the transom
above the waterline) vs. keeping the bottom straighter for
easier propulsion.
This trade-off makes me wonder if it actually makes sense to
add enough rocker to get the transom completely out of the
water? Obviously Bolger doesn't think so in this case ...
Sincerely,
Ken Grome
Bagacay Boatworks
www.bagacayboatworks.com
> I was just looking at my old pile of MAIB's (15Mar94) and
> discovered a 'classic' Bolger Instant-Boat design with
> which I was not familiar. 7'6" by 2'0", a simple
> "Paddling Skiff" canoe like boat, buildable in a weekend,
> the smallest in the Advanced Sharpie series I think.
> Made out of about 1 and a half sheets of 1/4" plywood,
> weighing about 40 lbs. The waterline shown in the
> isometric is 200lbs.
>
>http://www.flickr.com/photos/hallman/2724590489/
> Don't know the timing of this design, but I wonder if was intended to test aQuoting PCB from the very brief write up in MAIB: "Dr. Nathan asked
> design.
>
> Don Schultz
me if I had a design easy and quick to build, for a couple of small
children to play with. I didn't have quite what he had in mind, but I
thought I could do it quickly if he could work from a rather informal
plan. The design was done on a sheet of typewriter paper in 3 1/2
hours...I hope he gets it done before the youngsters outgrow it..."
Design 613 is a relatively high number I think, for instance, Advanced
Sharpie 29 is design number 547.
Bolger has done scaled down versions to test a theory. Examples are Bee,
the forerunner to Hawkeye, Microtrawler, and retriever. Also Eeek!, ahead
of the AS series, and a Brick with a flooded box keel, the name/number of
which I've forgotten.
They really weren't intended to be practical designs with a large following
IE, Micro, or Sneakeasy
Don't know the timing of this design, but I wonder if was intended to test a
design.
Don Schultz
"If you don't know where you're going, you'll end up somewhere else." Yogi
Berra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
the forerunner to Hawkeye, Microtrawler, and retriever. Also Eeek!, ahead
of the AS series, and a Brick with a flooded box keel, the name/number of
which I've forgotten.
They really weren't intended to be practical designs with a large following
IE, Micro, or Sneakeasy
Don't know the timing of this design, but I wonder if was intended to test a
design.
Don Schultz
"If you don't know where you're going, you'll end up somewhere else." Yogi
Berra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I was just looking at my old pile of MAIB's (15Mar94) and discovered a
'classic' Bolger Instant-Boat design with which I was not familiar.
7'6" by 2'0", a simple "Paddling Skiff" canoe like boat, buildable in
a weekend, the smallest in the Advanced Sharpie series I think. Made
out of about 1 and a half sheets of 1/4" plywood, weighing about 40
lbs. The waterline shown in the isometric is 200lbs.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/hallman/2724590489/
'classic' Bolger Instant-Boat design with which I was not familiar.
7'6" by 2'0", a simple "Paddling Skiff" canoe like boat, buildable in
a weekend, the smallest in the Advanced Sharpie series I think. Made
out of about 1 and a half sheets of 1/4" plywood, weighing about 40
lbs. The waterline shown in the isometric is 200lbs.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/hallman/2724590489/