Re: Whalewatcher photos
As I understand it and for what little it may be worth:
Indices like SA/D and SA/Wetted Area ratios have to be taken in context
to be meaningful. These are only useful in light and ghosting conditions
when raw sail area is more influential than sail and hull shapes. At
higher wind and boat speeds, sail planform and hull design
characteristics have to taken into account. There's no need for a whole
new set of SA/D guidelines if you don't try to apply it out of context.
The reason I mentioned SA/D ratio in the earlier post was because of
comments I saw about WW's performance in what I took to be light
conditions.
I wouldn't be so inclined to pin a definition of efficiency down to one
thing because "efficiency" depends so much on what the goal is. If
you're trying to make boats of good capacity and performance available
to those who want them but might not otherwise be able to afford it,
then Drive/Cost ratio seems to be a very good way to look at it. I sorta
like a Drive/Hassle definition, where hassle is in terms of setting up
and sailing. It might not always be the cheapest but it can make things
enough easier so that you go sailing more often than otherwise. I think
your idea of Drive/Heeling ratio overlaps this somewhat since it's
definitely a hassle when you have to go to extremes (either in cost or
athletics or both) to provide extra righting moment for a tall rig.
Unfortunately, the physics of the situation are unforgiving. What we
gain in one area we have to give up in another. Another measure of
efficiency is the Lift/Drag ratio. If the boat needs to be able to sail
high, then L/D has to be improved. There's no getting around it. Which
is why racing boats tend toward the high aspect ratio tall rigs and high
A/R fin keels on slippery hulls--none of which is cheap or easy--lousy
Drive/Cost ratio. But these sails, by design, lack drag, and lift is not
necessarily drive. As the boat falls off to beam and broad reaches, sail
drag lines up better with the desired track and adds to the drive. A low
sail plan, with its poorer L/D, does this much better than the marconi
sail and has better drive for the area--but only in this direction. And
how high do we have to sail anyway? The 80 - 20 rule seems to apply. If
we can get 80 percent of what we want at 20 percent of the cost, not
bad. Fire up the motor when we have to make up the difference.
Indices like SA/D and SA/Wetted Area ratios have to be taken in context
to be meaningful. These are only useful in light and ghosting conditions
when raw sail area is more influential than sail and hull shapes. At
higher wind and boat speeds, sail planform and hull design
characteristics have to taken into account. There's no need for a whole
new set of SA/D guidelines if you don't try to apply it out of context.
The reason I mentioned SA/D ratio in the earlier post was because of
comments I saw about WW's performance in what I took to be light
conditions.
I wouldn't be so inclined to pin a definition of efficiency down to one
thing because "efficiency" depends so much on what the goal is. If
you're trying to make boats of good capacity and performance available
to those who want them but might not otherwise be able to afford it,
then Drive/Cost ratio seems to be a very good way to look at it. I sorta
like a Drive/Hassle definition, where hassle is in terms of setting up
and sailing. It might not always be the cheapest but it can make things
enough easier so that you go sailing more often than otherwise. I think
your idea of Drive/Heeling ratio overlaps this somewhat since it's
definitely a hassle when you have to go to extremes (either in cost or
athletics or both) to provide extra righting moment for a tall rig.
Unfortunately, the physics of the situation are unforgiving. What we
gain in one area we have to give up in another. Another measure of
efficiency is the Lift/Drag ratio. If the boat needs to be able to sail
high, then L/D has to be improved. There's no getting around it. Which
is why racing boats tend toward the high aspect ratio tall rigs and high
A/R fin keels on slippery hulls--none of which is cheap or easy--lousy
Drive/Cost ratio. But these sails, by design, lack drag, and lift is not
necessarily drive. As the boat falls off to beam and broad reaches, sail
drag lines up better with the desired track and adds to the drive. A low
sail plan, with its poorer L/D, does this much better than the marconi
sail and has better drive for the area--but only in this direction. And
how high do we have to sail anyway? The 80 - 20 rule seems to apply. If
we can get 80 percent of what we want at 20 percent of the cost, not
bad. Fire up the motor when we have to make up the difference.
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Doug" <oarman89@...> wrote:
>
> I think that the conventional wisdom on appropriate sail
area/displacement ratios is applicable only for marconi rigged sloops,
since those are by far the dominant configuration today. Because of the
high aspect ratios of these rigs, if the sail area gets large, the
center of effort gets high and the heeling moment quickly becomes
excessive. This in turn leads to deep draft, high ballast ratios, and
extreme design elements like ballast bulbs on the end of fin keels. If
you want the speed that comes from high SA/D ratio, in the fashionable
rigs, you need a pretty extreme hull design.
>
> The beauty of the quadrilateral and split rigs that Mr. Bolger favored
is that the sail area gets spread out horizontally rather than
vertically, whether on long booms or on yards, or both. The center of
effort stays low so the heeling moment stays low. Not as much ballast is
needed. Wading draft is practical. One can carry plenty of sail area for
ghosting, without the complication of flying a spinnaker. On any given
hull, you can carry much more sail area in the low rigs than in the
marconi sloops. A whole new set of SA/D guidelines is needed for the low
rigs. It would be a nice little research project to mine this data out
of the PB&F design catalog. Easily reefed rigs line the Chinese gaff
will have even higher ratios.
>
> Mr. Bolger's writings often promoted drive to cost ratio as a measure
of rig efficiency. I think the better measure of rig efficiency is drive
to unit heeling moment ratio.
>
> Doug
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "cecbell" cecbell@ wrote:
> > Ted Brewer offers the
> > characterization that values over 20 are high and typical of
ultra-light
> > racers, class racers and daysailers. By comparison, coastal cruisers
> > tend to be lower, around 16 - 17, and racing yachts about 17 - 19.
>
Great little video, Harry. I can never get enough of this type of footage. In flat conditions, I guess that pram type bows like the Martha Jane do very well, going over the water rather than through it. But as with anything in boats there's always a trade off. I imagine the Martha Jane would come off second best going to windward in a sharp chop.
Bow shapes are an interesting discussion. I'm sure I've read somewhere about Phil saying that sharpies are designed to go over the water rather than through it and hence the overhangs in a lot of his designs, but perhaps that discussion belongs on another thread!
Bow shapes are an interesting discussion. I'm sure I've read somewhere about Phil saying that sharpies are designed to go over the water rather than through it and hence the overhangs in a lot of his designs, but perhaps that discussion belongs on another thread!
George was on a broad reach alright, here is a video as you and I were watching. First that pretty green schooner then George coming by. I didn't realize until 2-3 min later that George was overhauling that schooner so rapidly so I stopped shooting. George got headed just as he goes by and sheets in main then mizzen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4h4R7Yc3MA
HJ
Bruce Hallman wrote:
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Harry James<welshman@...>wrote:Here is a picture of Mark Zieger's MJ. His brother Dave is in the bow messing with the sail set so the bow is down a little. Very clean wake but the speed is revealed by the towed nymph's being up on step.http://www.alaska.net/~fritzf/Boats/MJ/bone.jpgHJInteresting photo. Judging by the angle of the mainsail, am I seeing it right? He seems to be pointing into the wind too. Is the far side leeboard down? My recollection of watching George Broadlick in action was that he was doing broad reaches when he was passing the keel boats, showing off to us, in front of the Maritime Heritage Center dock. ------------------------------------ Bolger rules!!! - NO "GO AWAY SPAMMER!" posts!!! Please! - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, respamming, 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.comYahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bolger/<*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bolger/join(Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email:bolger-digest@yahoogroups.combolger-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
I think that the conventional wisdom on appropriate sail area/displacement ratios is applicable only for marconi rigged sloops, since those are by far the dominant configuration today. Because of the high aspect ratios of these rigs, if the sail area gets large, the center of effort gets high and the heeling moment quickly becomes excessive. This in turn leads to deep draft, high ballast ratios, and extreme design elements like ballast bulbs on the end of fin keels. If you want the speed that comes from high SA/D ratio, in the fashionable rigs, you need a pretty extreme hull design.
The beauty of the quadrilateral and split rigs that Mr. Bolger favored is that the sail area gets spread out horizontally rather than vertically, whether on long booms or on yards, or both. The center of effort stays low so the heeling moment stays low. Not as much ballast is needed. Wading draft is practical. One can carry plenty of sail area for ghosting, without the complication of flying a spinnaker. On any given hull, you can carry much more sail area in the low rigs than in the marconi sloops. A whole new set of SA/D guidelines is needed for the low rigs. It would be a nice little research project to mine this data out of the PB&F design catalog. Easily reefed rigs line the Chinese gaff will have even higher ratios.
Mr. Bolger's writings often promoted drive to cost ratio as a measure of rig efficiency. I think the better measure of rig efficiency is drive to unit heeling moment ratio.
Doug
The beauty of the quadrilateral and split rigs that Mr. Bolger favored is that the sail area gets spread out horizontally rather than vertically, whether on long booms or on yards, or both. The center of effort stays low so the heeling moment stays low. Not as much ballast is needed. Wading draft is practical. One can carry plenty of sail area for ghosting, without the complication of flying a spinnaker. On any given hull, you can carry much more sail area in the low rigs than in the marconi sloops. A whole new set of SA/D guidelines is needed for the low rigs. It would be a nice little research project to mine this data out of the PB&F design catalog. Easily reefed rigs line the Chinese gaff will have even higher ratios.
Mr. Bolger's writings often promoted drive to cost ratio as a measure of rig efficiency. I think the better measure of rig efficiency is drive to unit heeling moment ratio.
Doug
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "cecbell" <cecbell@...> wrote:
> Ted Brewer offers the
> characterization that values over 20 are high and typical of ultra-light
> racers, class racers and daysailers. By comparison, coastal cruisers
> tend to be lower, around 16 - 17, and racing yachts about 17 - 19.
Definitely he's on a broad reach. The ripples on the water in the foreground and the press of the sail on the mast indicate that the wind is coming from his starboard quarter (almost directly over the top of the dinghy from the photographer's perspective).
> Interesting photo. Judging by the angle of the mainsail, am I seeing
> it right? He seems to be pointing into the wind too. Is the far side
> leeboard down? My recollection of watching George Broadlick in action
> was that he was doing broad reaches when he was passing the keel
> boats, showing off to us, in front of the Maritime Heritage Center
> dock.
>
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Harry James <welshman@...> wrote:
it right? He seems to be pointing into the wind too. Is the far side
leeboard down? My recollection of watching George Broadlick in action
was that he was doing broad reaches when he was passing the keel
boats, showing off to us, in front of the Maritime Heritage Center
dock.
>Interesting photo. Judging by the angle of the mainsail, am I seeing
>
>
> Here is a picture of Mark Zieger's MJ. His brother Dave is in the bow messing with the sail set so the bow is down a little. Very clean wake but the speed is revealed by the towed nymph's being up on step.
>
>http://www.alaska.net/~fritzf/Boats/MJ/bone.jpg
>
> HJ
>
it right? He seems to be pointing into the wind too. Is the far side
leeboard down? My recollection of watching George Broadlick in action
was that he was doing broad reaches when he was passing the keel
boats, showing off to us, in front of the Maritime Heritage Center
dock.
Here is a picture of Mark Zieger's MJ. His brother Dave is in the bow
messing with the sail set so the bow is down a little. Very clean wake
but the speed is revealed by the towed nymph's being up on step.
http://www.alaska.net/~fritzf/Boats/MJ/bone.jpg
HJ
cecbell wrote:
http://www.alaska.net/~fritzf/Boats/MJ/bone.jpg
HJ
cecbell wrote:
Bruce, thanks. What I take from that is that MJ has a wide range of operating wind conditions. It's not a case of having a sweet spot that just favors one end of the wind scale. To my mind that makes for a more practical boat. As I'm sure you mean to suggest, that would point to hull design as well. --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Hallman<hallman@...>wrote:On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 9:35 AM, cecbell cecbell@... wrote:This is interesting. I'd read that the Sail Area/Displacement ratiois away of comparing boats relative performance in light conditionsWhen I saw George Broadlick and Martha Jane sail the pants off of those keel boats last September, the wind was brisk and gusty.------------------------------------ Bolger rules!!! - NO "GO AWAY SPAMMER!" posts!!! Please! - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, respamming, 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.comYahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bolger/<*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bolger/join(Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email:bolger-digest@yahoogroups.combolger-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
I was doing a video of him passing the dock and it wasn't until he was
past that I realized he had blown by the larger schooner behind him that
I thought was going fast.
HJ
Bruce Hallman wrote:
past that I realized he had blown by the larger schooner behind him that
I thought was going fast.
HJ
Bruce Hallman wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 6:25 AM, mason smith <goodboat@...> wrote:
>
>>
>> Yes, the Whalewatcher is relatively fast in the conditions we met.
>>
>
> I am not surprised to hear this, based on seeing the jaw-dropping
> speed of George Broadlick's Martha Jane last September. MJ is a
> similar hull shape to WW, and MJ zoomed past many a keel boat that
> weekend in Glouchester.
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - NO "GO AWAY SPAMMER!" posts!!! Please!
> - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, respamming, 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.comYahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
Bruce, thanks. What I take from that is that MJ has a wide range of
operating wind conditions. It's not a case of having a sweet spot that
just favors one end of the wind scale. To my mind that makes for a more
practical boat. As I'm sure you mean to suggest, that would point to
hull design as well.
operating wind conditions. It's not a case of having a sweet spot that
just favors one end of the wind scale. To my mind that makes for a more
practical boat. As I'm sure you mean to suggest, that would point to
hull design as well.
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Hallman <hallman@...> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 9:35 AM, cecbell cecbell@... wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > This is interesting. I'd read that the Sail Area/Displacement ratio
is a
> > way of comparing boats relative performance in light conditions
>
>
> When I saw George Broadlick and Martha Jane sail the pants off of
> those keel boats last September, the wind was brisk and gusty.
>
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 9:35 AM, cecbell <cecbell@...> wrote:
those keel boats last September, the wind was brisk and gusty.
>When I saw George Broadlick and Martha Jane sail the pants off of
>
>
> This is interesting. I'd read that the Sail Area/Displacement ratio is a
> way of comparing boats relative performance in light conditions
those keel boats last September, the wind was brisk and gusty.
This is interesting. I'd read that the Sail Area/Displacement ratio is a
way of comparing boats relative performance in light conditions and, out
of curiosity, did the arithmetic for MJ and WW using the figures in
BWAOM.
MJ comes out at 22.4 and WW at 23.4. Ted Brewer offers the
characterization that values over 20 are high and typical of ultra-light
racers, class racers and daysailers. By comparison, coastal cruisers
tend to be lower, around 16 - 17, and racing yachts about 17 - 19. This
would point to MJ and WW as being exceptional in these conditions. That
seems to match oservations.
way of comparing boats relative performance in light conditions and, out
of curiosity, did the arithmetic for MJ and WW using the figures in
BWAOM.
MJ comes out at 22.4 and WW at 23.4. Ted Brewer offers the
characterization that values over 20 are high and typical of ultra-light
racers, class racers and daysailers. By comparison, coastal cruisers
tend to be lower, around 16 - 17, and racing yachts about 17 - 19. This
would point to MJ and WW as being exceptional in these conditions. That
seems to match oservations.
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Hallman <hallman@...> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 6:25 AM, mason smith goodboat@... wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Yes, the Whalewatcher is relatively fast in the conditions we met.
>
> I am not surprised to hear this, based on seeing the jaw-dropping
> speed of George Broadlick's Martha Jane last September. MJ is a
> similar hull shape to WW, and MJ zoomed past many a keel boat that
> weekend in Glouchester.
>
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 6:25 AM, mason smith <goodboat@...> wrote:
speed of George Broadlick's Martha Jane last September. MJ is a
similar hull shape to WW, and MJ zoomed past many a keel boat that
weekend in Glouchester.
>I am not surprised to hear this, based on seeing the jaw-dropping
>
>
> Yes, the Whalewatcher is relatively fast in the conditions we met.
speed of George Broadlick's Martha Jane last September. MJ is a
similar hull shape to WW, and MJ zoomed past many a keel boat that
weekend in Glouchester.
Yes, the Whalewatcher is relatively fast in the
conditions we met. There were some Etchells raceboats going in and out of the
harbor with us and I think we outdid them running in, with light winds, and Phil
describes outpacing something else, "a conventional cruiser-racer, 5' draft with
a very tall mast," in his write-up. With that length, light weight, and big
sail-plan she can't help but go. He calls her "Fast Weekend Cruiser" in MAIB and
mentions that she is a "good ghoster."
The night before, as Pat and I
brought her around from an upriver launch-ramp, we had far more wind, but we had
two problems and no time to deal with them properly due to delays in launching.
First, we had no means for hauling the boom aft to its proper position (and its
weight and the sail and yard geometry cause it to tend to shoot too far
forward), and second, we found the rope parrel we had made, to keep the yard
alongside the mast at the right position as it went up and down, and when up,
unsatisfactory. It bound hard, again and again, as the spar went up. That's what
Phil's referring to in mentioning our sail-setting difficulties. So that
evening, just before dark, we sailed enough to know that the boat goes fast and
is surprisingly stiff and unscary, even when the main isn't set taut but is
wrinkled and baggy. We were very happy with speed and stiffness and
unflappabililty. And then we let the sail down and motored around the point ant
into the harbor to our mooring among the high-$$$ yachets.
What we should have done, if we
hadn't thought we'd better get to the mooring before dark, was anchor right
after getting away from the launch, and get the sails up (for the first time in
a breeze) under good conditions for problem-solving. Then we'd really have been
able to check her out with those 15-20 mph winds. My impression is, anyway, that
she wouldn't really need a reef in them is you were willing to feather up in the
gusts. She has three sets of points in her main; in this mizzen, none. That
water ballast must really work.
Speeds? Well, that evening,
upwind, comparing with the familiar speed of 6 mph in my Micro, surely 7 or 8
mph, with potential for more (I'm used to mph rather than knots on my GPS).
Next day in much lighter airs and even calms, nothing outstanding but as much as
anything on the water around us, at least off the wind. My point would be that
one of the great attractions for me in the design is that its promise of
delightful speed. How can you not like a little bit of that? Even though I never
forget the wisdome of a fellow who owned a Meadowlark saying, "I pity anyone who
wants to go fast in a sailboat." ---Mason
----- Original Message -----From:creditscorenzSent:Friday, July 23, 2010 1:48 AMSubject:[bolger] Re: Whalewatcher photos
Thanks for your reply, Mason.
Another interesting thing I noticed with these photos is that the sails are full, but except for the wave in front of the leeboard there's almost no indication that the boat is actually moving. There's virtually no wake at all! Are we seeing Sea of Peas in action here? I can see from the water that the winds must have been very light, but the sails are set such that the boat must have been moving along nicely. What sort of speeds do you think you achieved that day and how did it go relative to the other boats I can see in the background?
> Whalewatcher would surely be a great family camping vessel. I hope we > hear from Pat Connor about his sailing her in the Great Lakes this
> summer with his family..---Mason
I'm hoping so too...
Cheers,
Rob.
Thanks for your reply, Mason.
Another interesting thing I noticed with these photos is that the sails are full, but except for the wave in front of the leeboard there's almost no indication that the boat is actually moving. There's virtually no wake at all! Are we seeing Sea of Peas in action here? I can see from the water that the winds must have been very light, but the sails are set such that the boat must have been moving along nicely. What sort of speeds do you think you achieved that day and how did it go relative to the other boats I can see in the background?
Cheers,
Rob.
Another interesting thing I noticed with these photos is that the sails are full, but except for the wave in front of the leeboard there's almost no indication that the boat is actually moving. There's virtually no wake at all! Are we seeing Sea of Peas in action here? I can see from the water that the winds must have been very light, but the sails are set such that the boat must have been moving along nicely. What sort of speeds do you think you achieved that day and how did it go relative to the other boats I can see in the background?
> Whalewatcher would surely be a great family camping vessel. I hope we > hear from Pat Connor about his sailing her in the Great Lakes thisI'm hoping so too...
> summer with his family..---Mason
Cheers,
Rob.
Hi Mason,
I enjoy your comments about Bolger boats.
I was curios about whether or not Whalewatcher pounds going to weather. I ask because I have a Michalak JB Jr that has a similar bow shape and it pounds like crazy.
Thank you,
Reed
I enjoy your comments about Bolger boats.
I was curios about whether or not Whalewatcher pounds going to weather. I ask because I have a Michalak JB Jr that has a similar bow shape and it pounds like crazy.
Thank you,
Reed
Mason here. I'll reply in the midst of your text,
if I can. No, I can't navigate and insert text very well that way. So:
1. the gaff mizzen. Maybe we should ask Susanne.
More sail for given mast height? More efficient sail for given area. Why does
LFH use short gaffs on Meadowlark and other boats. Same reasons, I suppose. I
like it.
2. The leeboards are meant to be adjusted for
balance and point of sailing. We had the dagger board in place, I think, during
these maneuvers, Also, the attachment of the pendants were unrefined and caught
on the ledges, and that may have had something to do with the position of the
boards. Finally, we had far too many skippers and nobody really commanding the
vessel!
3.I think the dagger board is a good feature. I
would not leave it out. It has its official purpose, giving balance when the
boards are swept aft for shoal sailing, but if it's anything like Dovekie's bow
board in use, many sailors might leave it in place in other conditions too --
working upwind, say. Probably a nuisance running. Whalewatcher is not a boat
with bells and whistles, it's pretty spare and functional, and to do anything
about the daggerboard involves climbing out of the cabin onto the cabin top
and around the mast and tabernacle and dropping down into the bow well.
4. I think a long arm could reach the tiller from
the companionway but it would be awkward to steer much from there. Anybody
sailing a WW a lot might well cook up a better way to steer from inside if it
came to seem important. How I wish we had spent the rest of that day sailing at
Annapolis, with Phil and Susanne, instead of hurrying off in various directions.
We would surely have explored getting her to sail herself.
Whalewatcher would surely be a great family camping
vessel. I hope we hear from Pat Connor about his sailing her in the Great Lakes
this summer with his family..---Mason
----- Original Message -----From:creditscorenzSent:Thur.sday, July 22, 2010 6:20 AMSubject:[bolger] Re: Whalewatcher photost
Missed your posting of these latest photos received from Suzanne, Mason. They're excellent, thank you both. I particularly like the photo with the bow towards the camera. These advanced sharpie bows have a very masculine look about them don't they?
I sail a Michalak Philsboat and have really come to appreciate the virtues of the Birdwatcher concept.
Unfortunately, its too small for a family though, and you have to camp on land. We've tried it with a four day camping trip recently and although we had fun it would have been so much easier to stay on the boat.
A couple of questions about Whalewatcher.
1. Do you know why the mizzen has a small gaff? Usually they are just a sharpie sprit.Susanne might better answer this question. I suppose that the gaff gives you a little more sail area for the given mast height, an a more efficient sail for its area . Esthetically it goes nicely with
2. Is the position of the leeboards correct or are they supposed to be more towards the vertical? I guess you had them swept back because the bowboard was in place?
3. Wondering whether that bowboard stops pounding in rougher water or whether it's a complication that inhibits tacking, makes for unstable steerage, creates additional drag and isn't really worth the trouble. If I did this build my instinct would be to leave it out.
4. Can you steer from the companionway or must you stay back in the cockpit?
I can imagine a couple of kids having a great time sitting up front in that bow area (providing there is no bowboard trunk spit). As I've mentioned in a previous post as a trailerable sailing boat to holiday camp on in sheltered waters I reckon this one's hard to beat with it's four descent sized berths and nice airy interior.
Cheers,
Rob.
Missed your posting of these latest photos received from Suzanne, Mason. They're excellent, thank you both. I particularly like the photo with the bow towards the camera. These advanced sharpie bows have a very masculine look about them don't they?
I sail a Michalak Philsboat and have really come to appreciate the virtues of the Birdwatcher concept.
Unfortunately, its too small for a family though, and you have to camp on land. We've tried it with a four day camping trip recently and although we had fun it would have been so much easier to stay on the boat.
A couple of questions about Whalewatcher.
1. Do you know why the mizzen has a small gaff? Usually they are just a sharpie sprit.
2. Is the position of the leeboards correct or are they supposed to be more towards the vertical? I guess you had them swept back because the bowboard was in place?
3. Wondering whether that bowboard stops pounding in rougher water or whether it's a complication that inhibits tacking, makes for unstable steerage, creates additional drag and isn't really worth the trouble. If I did this build my instinct would be to leave it out.
4. Can you steer from the companionway or must you stay back in the cockpit?
I can imagine a couple of kids having a great time sitting up front in that bow area (providing there is no bowboard trunk spit). As I've mentioned in a previous post as a trailerable sailing boat to holiday camp on in sheltered waters I reckon this one's hard to beat with it's four descent sized berths and nice airy interior.
Cheers,
Rob.
I sail a Michalak Philsboat and have really come to appreciate the virtues of the Birdwatcher concept.
Unfortunately, its too small for a family though, and you have to camp on land. We've tried it with a four day camping trip recently and although we had fun it would have been so much easier to stay on the boat.
A couple of questions about Whalewatcher.
1. Do you know why the mizzen has a small gaff? Usually they are just a sharpie sprit.
2. Is the position of the leeboards correct or are they supposed to be more towards the vertical? I guess you had them swept back because the bowboard was in place?
3. Wondering whether that bowboard stops pounding in rougher water or whether it's a complication that inhibits tacking, makes for unstable steerage, creates additional drag and isn't really worth the trouble. If I did this build my instinct would be to leave it out.
4. Can you steer from the companionway or must you stay back in the cockpit?
I can imagine a couple of kids having a great time sitting up front in that bow area (providing there is no bowboard trunk spit). As I've mentioned in a previous post as a trailerable sailing boat to holiday camp on in sheltered waters I reckon this one's hard to beat with it's four descent sized berths and nice airy interior.
Cheers,
Rob.
I just want to thank adkgoodboat for posting the pictures of Whalewatcher. There are lots of ideas to conjure with in this design, and I'm really glad to have the chance to see a few snapshots.
The rig may be the most proven part of the design. I'm really liking the look of these balanced lugs.
The rig may be the most proven part of the design. I'm really liking the look of these balanced lugs.
I guess that's a good idea, Bruce. I have tried several times to put
photos in the album I did create, but they don't arrive there. I will
try Flickr. Tomorrow, perhaps. Mason
photos in the album I did create, but they don't arrive there. I will
try Flickr. Tomorrow, perhaps. Mason
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Bruce Hallman" <bruce@...> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 1:48 PM, adkgoodboat <masonsmith@...> wrote:
> > I've selected a portfolio of shots of the Whalewatcher, finished
but
> > stuck here for the winter. Not sure how to put them up, but I can
> > them to anybody interested. Meanwhile I'll try to learn how to
post
> > them. ---Mason
>
> Can I suggest that you upload them to the photo sharing website
> Flickr? www.flickr.com
>
> I have found that free site to be more accessible than the Yahoo
> Groups photo albums.
>
> I would be happy to help you do it if you need help. Email me the
> pictures, or whatever.
>
> Here are the Whalewatcher isometric renderings I put on Flickr
earlier:
>
>http://flickr.com/photos/hallman/tags/whalewatcher/
>
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 1:48 PM, adkgoodboat <masonsmith@...> wrote:
Flickr? www.flickr.com
I have found that free site to be more accessible than the Yahoo
Groups photo albums.
I would be happy to help you do it if you need help. Email me the
pictures, or whatever.
Here are the Whalewatcher isometric renderings I put on Flickr earlier:
http://flickr.com/photos/hallman/tags/whalewatcher/
> I've selected a portfolio of shots of the Whalewatcher, finished butCan I suggest that you upload them to the photo sharing website
> stuck here for the winter. Not sure how to put them up, but I can email
> them to anybody interested. Meanwhile I'll try to learn how to post
> them. ---Mason
Flickr? www.flickr.com
I have found that free site to be more accessible than the Yahoo
Groups photo albums.
I would be happy to help you do it if you need help. Email me the
pictures, or whatever.
Here are the Whalewatcher isometric renderings I put on Flickr earlier:
http://flickr.com/photos/hallman/tags/whalewatcher/
I've selected a portfolio of shots of the Whalewatcher, finished but
stuck here for the winter. Not sure how to put them up, but I can email
them to anybody interested. Meanwhile I'll try to learn how to post
them. ---Mason
stuck here for the winter. Not sure how to put them up, but I can email
them to anybody interested. Meanwhile I'll try to learn how to post
them. ---Mason