Re: Oldshoe Review!

Many factors, but. My Oldshoe never broached, probably because I stayed out of the rough stuff. The plan showed no end plate on Oldshoe but I saw it on other Bolger designs and added it to mine in 1988. (Oh my, 23 years.) I can see why it could add more authority to a shoal rudder. It could be a wise retrofit. Mine is about 5 inches wide, tapered forward and rounded aft.

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Gregory" <gregg.carlson@...> wrote:
>
> ...A broach is when a boat turns suddenly. The classic broach
> happens The rudder is the issue, but these designs do a great job > drawing next to no water, and you can't have it both ways....
>
> Gregg

Gregg

The more I think about it, the more I think you and Bruce, and most others answering this post are right. I don't think the vertical transom is instrumental in causing the broach.

However, there are two ways I believe Oldshoes blunt bow is probably less forgiving than Micro's or Long Micro's would be:

1) The mast in Oldshoe is stepped on the bottom strut of the Bow Transom, unlike Micro and LM which each have a separate step providing a short but wide forefoot. In actual fact, with Oldshoe nose down (an unusual occurrence) the sail actually is levering the bow down and into the water.

2) Because of her short length, when the blunt bow slams into chop, it stops her and, I believe, increases her tendency to trip, causing the bow well to fill with water through the step, compounded with being caught by the following wave... and the rest is history.

In any case, a more prudent captain (with a reef or two) and bunging the step in the bow transom should solve most of this issue.

The main problem with the blunt bow is being slowed by motorboat chop and I can't see a way round that.

David
Santiago, Chile

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Gregory" <gregg.carlson@...> wrote:
>
> A broach is when a boat turns suddenly. The classic broach happens on a broach reach or downwind, with lots of canvas and the skipper perhaps underestimating wind speed. The weather helm - due to the turning moment of the wide-set sail - overwhelms the rudder, especially if it ventilates and/or stalls due to high angle of attack and you are spun into beam reach with too much sail. Spinnakers are also very helpful in the upcoming capsize since they'll roll downwind.
>
> To be fair to the Old Shoe, you can broach any boat. Obviously the bigger and heavier the more extreme the conditions (and poorer seamanship) required. Your tiller angle is a really good indicator of things to come.
>
> All small boats can capsize, but the blunt bow and short rudder are certainly not going to be helpful in a hard-pressed Old Shoe. A thump on the bow at the wrong moment is going to be helpful in lifting the rudder for ventilation - and off you go.
>
> I was able to capsize my Micro in a big puff, but I don't think the bluff bow is a big problem for any of the square boats, and probably none at all for the heavy ones. The rudder is the issue, but these designs do a great job drawing next to no water, and you can't have it both ways.
>
> It's really not a design fault or a problem except to those that also believe a 12-passenger van ought to beat a Veyron around a race track.
>
> Gregg
>

Bruce

I believe you are right. In my case I was galloping along at close to hull speed, all very nice and stable thankyou, sailing quite nicely downwind.

The problem came as I rounded a headland, zoomed down a wave into a trough and took water in large quantities, first through the transom step and then over the top of the bow transom. Once the front anchor well starts to fill with water it pulls the bow down and the stern up.

The bottom of the mainsail driving her into the wave, was then caught by the wave and the rest is history.

Some water got through the hatch into the "airtight compartment" as water was scooped in over the bow. This possibly explains why she did not lie on her side. We did with two adults though, and she rounded up perfectly into the wind without sailing away, although she was blowing away.

I admit my capsize was mainly MY OWN FAULT. I should have had a reef or two in the main, and probably should have gone home as most everybody else had done by then. The problem is she feels so stable and safe that you really don't want to...

Regards,


David

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, BruceHallman <hallman@...> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 4:01 PM, daschultz2000
> <daschultz8275@...> wrote:
>
> > The other one that I read about made it clear the flat bow struck the next wave, and the boat immediately broached.
>
> I believe that broaching is most often caused by a displacement hull
> exceeding its hull speed. Perhaps what happened is that the hull
> surfed down the face of one wave and gained too much speed?
>

That's exactly what happened in my case if my fuzzy memories of it are correct. It was because I didn't have the miz squared out (inexperience with the rig). I would be under double reefs today in the kind of winds I was sailing under full sail that day.

I thought broaching had more to do with a boat being so overpowered that the underwater foils lose their lift and the boat becomes out of control. I don't think it has to do with wave action per se. But could be wrong...

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Myles J. Swift" <mswift@...> wrote:
>
> Also if this happened running downwind, it could be a mizzen problem. Munro
> used to drop Egret's mizzen when running the inlets to make sure the boat
> was pulled by the bow.
>
>
>
> MylesJ
>

My understanding of the usual cause of broaching has been that a following sea running faster then the boat picks up the stern and it falls off the front of the wave.

V/R
Chris

On 8/2/2011 12:00 PM, William wrote:

I have to agree with Bruce on this point.  The flat, transom bow on my Long Micro has never struck me as relevant to impeding headway or causing a broach (and I have never come close to broaching my LM).  I have also had my LM running downwind at 8.2 knots (SOG) in waves at least 50 inches from trough to crest (the height at which I can no longer see the horizon from the bottom of the trough) and not come close to exceeding the speed of the waves rolling-in from astern.  
I guess it is possible to exceed the speed of the waves and bury the bow into a wave, but I have never done it running downwind.  This speed far exceeds the theoretical hullspeed of the LM (5.6 knts?), but I notice no differences in tracking between 3 knots downwind or 6+ knots downwind. 

I don't doubt that people have broached their Oldshoes if they say they have.  I don't think the flat bow is the cause. Were they really sailing faster than the waves (*raises eyebrows quizzically*)? I'd like to hear more.

These box sharpies look funny, and many dock-side critics ascribe poor sailing qualities to these boats just by eyeballing them.  These critics are misinformed but, like us all, they have keyboards and internet connections and their rumors and misinformation spread.  I just want to point out that my experiences with my LM (which is bigger and heavier than an Oldshoe. This probably matters) have all been very positive when sailing at my limits.  These things are well-mannered, predictable, tolerant of fools, stable, and they sail well.  They do not pound sailing to windward and they alleged slapping and pounding at anchor is far overblown. Broaching has never struck me as a serious concern.  I realize I sound like a zealot or defender of the box sharpie.  I am.


Bill, in Texas
Long Micro Pugnacious

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, BruceHallman<hallman@...>wrote:

On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 6:15 PM, daschultz2000<daschultz8275@...>wrote:

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, BruceHallman <hallman@> wrote:

I believe that broaching is most often caused by a displacement hull
exceeding its hull speed. Perhaps what happened is that the hull
surfed down the face of one wave and gained too much speed?

Yes. That fits with the description of the situation. The writer described the boat heading down the face of the wave, the bow striking the next wave and stopping the boat, except the back of the boat kept coming, broaching the hull.

Don

I am not sure that the bluntness of the transomed bow increases the
risk broaching due to its bluntness.  When I look at designs intended
for bar crossing or inlet running, they all seem to have in common the
character of plenty of reserve buoyancy in the bow.  This, I deduce,
is intended to allow the bow to float high upon encountering the
backside of a wave when surfing.

(Also, I see in the Inlet Running boats a converse, low reserve
buoyancy in the stern; which also would help the bow to float high
when encountering the backside of a wave.)

In other words, I don't think the goal in avoiding broaches is for the
bow to cut through the next wave, but rather it is for the bow to rise
up when it hits the backside of the next wave.  I think it is
misguided to point to "the bow stopping the boat", and if anything a
transomed bow would have better reserve buoyancy characteristics than
a knife edge bow.

------------------------------------

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 have to agree with Bruce on this point. The flat, transom bow on my Long Micro has never struck me as relevant to impeding headway or causing a broach (and I have never come close to broaching my LM). I have also had my LM running downwind at 8.2 knots (SOG) in waves at least 50 inches from trough to crest (the height at which I can no longer see the horizon from the bottom of the trough) and not come close to exceeding the speed of the waves rolling-in from astern.
I guess it is possible to exceed the speed of the waves and bury the bow into a wave, but I have never done it running downwind. This speed far exceeds the theoretical hullspeed of the LM (5.6 knts?), but I notice no differences in tracking between 3 knots downwind or 6+ knots downwind.

I don't doubt that people have broached their Oldshoes if they say they have. I don't think the flat bow is the cause. Were they really sailing faster than the waves (*raises eyebrows quizzically*)? I'd like to hear more.

These box sharpies look funny, and many dock-side critics ascribe poor sailing qualities to these boats just by eyeballing them. These critics are misinformed but, like us all, they have keyboards and internet connections and their rumors and misinformation spread. I just want to point out that my experiences with my LM (which is bigger and heavier than an Oldshoe. This probably matters) have all been very positive when sailing at my limits. These things are well-mannered, predictable, tolerant of fools, stable, and they sail well. They do not pound sailing to windward and they alleged slapping and pounding at anchor is far overblown. Broaching has never struck me as a serious concern. I realize I sound like a zealot or defender of the box sharpie. I am.


Bill, in Texas
Long Micro Pugnacious

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, BruceHallman <hallman@...> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 6:15 PM, daschultz2000
> <daschultz8275@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, BruceHallman <hallman@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I believe that broaching is most often caused by a displacement hull
> > > exceeding its hull speed. Perhaps what happened is that the hull
> > > surfed down the face of one wave and gained too much speed?
> > >
> >
> > Yes. That fits with the description of the situation. The writer described the boat heading down the face of the wave, the bow striking the next wave and stopping the boat, except the back of the boat kept coming, broaching the hull.
> >
> > Don
>
> I am not sure that the bluntness of the transomed bow increases the
> risk broaching due to its bluntness. When I look at designs intended
> for bar crossing or inlet running, they all seem to have in common the
> character of plenty of reserve buoyancy in the bow. This, I deduce,
> is intended to allow the bow to float high upon encountering the
> backside of a wave when surfing.
>
> (Also, I see in the Inlet Running boats a converse, low reserve
> buoyancy in the stern; which also would help the bow to float high
> when encountering the backside of a wave.)
>
> In other words, I don't think the goal in avoiding broaches is for the
> bow to cut through the next wave, but rather it is for the bow to rise
> up when it hits the backside of the next wave. I think it is
> misguided to point to "the bow stopping the boat", and if anything a
> transomed bow would have better reserve buoyancy characteristics than
> a knife edge bow.
>

A broach is when a boat turns suddenly. The classic broach happens on a broach reach or downwind, with lots of canvas and the skipper perhaps underestimating wind speed. The weather helm - due to the turning moment of the wide-set sail - overwhelms the rudder, especially if it ventilates and/or stalls due to high angle of attack and you are spun into beam reach with too much sail. Spinnakers are also very helpful in the upcoming capsize since they'll roll downwind.

To be fair to the Old Shoe, you can broach any boat. Obviously the bigger and heavier the more extreme the conditions (and poorer seamanship) required. Your tiller angle is a really good indicator of things to come.

All small boats can capsize, but the blunt bow and short rudder are certainly not going to be helpful in a hard-pressed Old Shoe. A thump on the bow at the wrong moment is going to be helpful in lifting the rudder for ventilation - and off you go.

I was able to capsize my Micro in a big puff, but I don't think the bluff bow is a big problem for any of the square boats, and probably none at all for the heavy ones. The rudder is the issue, but these designs do a great job drawing next to no water, and you can't have it both ways.

It's really not a design fault or a problem except to those that also believe a 12-passenger van ought to beat a Veyron around a race track.

Gregg

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "daschultz2000" <daschultz8275@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, BruceHallman <hallman@> wrote:
> >
> > Fascinating, two reports of capsized Old Shoes?! Wow.
> >
>
>
> The other one that I read about made it clear the flat bow struck the next wave, and the boat immediately broached. Something one will need to avoid with that design. Perhaps the Old Shoe, because of its length/beam and even the mizzen is prone to that behavior even in a coastal situation. And perhaps the whole family of flat bowed ASxx's can demonstrate that behavior if they are in just the right situation for a particular hull.
>
> But if that were so, it seems like the Micro at least would have a reputation for the behavior by now since there are many of them.
>

Sounds like your are advocating Phil Bolger's box cutwater, correct?

On Aug 1, 2011, at 4:00 PM, westwind9900 wrote:

 

There is an aspect of broaching that doesn't seem to be commonly addressed. An idealized wave is shown as water particles at the surface in a circular motion, rising and moving forward, then falling and moving backward, with no net motion as the wave passes. A boat loses control and broaches when it is moving at approximately the same speed as the wave, with its bow in the trough and its stern near the crest. In that position, the boat is moving at about the same speed as the water at the crest of the wave, and there is little or no flow over the rudder, resulting in a loss of steering control. This is a momentary condition, and whether the boat actually loses control and broaches or not will depend on its tendency to root and become directionally unstable, and hence the attention paid to the shapes of bows and sterns. A boat with bow steering should maintain control at that point, but would lose directional control at a different point in the cycle, when the bow was near the crest of the wave, but at that point the tendency of the hull to become directionally unstable would be less and bow steering might be safer overall. Apart from that, I would like to see the behavior of a box hull such as Oldshoe, Micro, AS-xx, etc. with a box keel projecting right out to the bow transom. It seems to me that the additional bouyancy would act like a shock-absorber, smoothing out slamming in a chop, and lifting the bow earlier in a surfing-type situation when otherwise the bow would try to dig in. Of course, adding a box keel to one of these hulls would be in effect to create a new boat entirely, with much attention needed to matters of ballasting and stability...

Best regards to all,
Calvin Devries

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, BruceHallman <hallman@...> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 6:15 PM, daschultz2000
> <daschultz8275@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, BruceHallman <hallman@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I believe that broaching is most often caused by a displacement hull
> > > exceeding its hull speed. Perhaps what happened is that the hull
> > > surfed down the face of one wave and gained too much speed?
> > >
> >
> > Yes. That fits with the description of the situation. The writer described the boat heading down the face of the wave, the bow striking the next wave and stopping the boat, except the back of the boat kept coming, broaching the hull.
> >
> > Don
>
> I am not sure that the bluntness of the transomed bow increases the
> risk broaching due to its bluntness. When I look at designs intended
> for bar crossing or inlet running, they all seem to have in common the
> character of plenty of reserve buoyancy in the bow. This, I deduce,
> is intended to allow the bow to float high upon encountering the
> backside of a wave when surfing.
>
> (Also, I see in the Inlet Running boats a converse, low reserve
> buoyancy in the stern; which also would help the bow to float high
> when encountering the backside of a wave.)
>
> In other words, I don't think the goal in avoiding broaches is for the
> bow to cut through the next wave, but rather it is for the bow to rise
> up when it hits the backside of the next wave. I think it is
> misguided to point to "the bow stopping the boat", and if anything a
> transomed bow would have better reserve buoyancy characteristics than
> a knife edge bow.
>

There is an aspect of broaching that doesn't seem to be commonly addressed. An idealized wave is shown as water particles at the surface in a circular motion, rising and moving forward, then falling and moving backward, with no net motion as the wave passes. A boat loses control and broaches when it is moving at approximately the same speed as the wave, with its bow in the trough and its stern near the crest. In that position, the boat is moving at about the same speed as the water at the crest of the wave, and there is little or no flow over the rudder, resulting in a loss of steering control. This is a momentary condition, and whether the boat actually loses control and broaches or not will depend on its tendency to root and become directionally unstable, and hence the attention paid to the shapes of bows and sterns. A boat with bow steering should maintain control at that point, but would lose directional control at a different point in the cycle, when the bow was near the crest of the wave, but at that point the tendency of the hull to become directionally unstable would be less and bow steering might be safer overall. Apart from that, I would like to see the behavior of a box hull such as Oldshoe, Micro, AS-xx, etc. with a box keel projecting right out to the bow transom. It seems to me that the additional bouyancy would act like a shock-absorber, smoothing out slamming in a chop, and lifting the bow earlier in a surfing-type situation when otherwise the bow would try to dig in. Of course, adding a box keel to one of these hulls would be in effect to create a new boat entirely, with much attention needed to matters of ballasting and stability...

Best regards to all,
Calvin Devries

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, BruceHallman <hallman@...> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 6:15 PM, daschultz2000
> <daschultz8275@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, BruceHallman <hallman@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I believe that broaching is most often caused by a displacement hull
> > > exceeding its hull speed. Perhaps what happened is that the hull
> > > surfed down the face of one wave and gained too much speed?
> > >
> >
> > Yes. That fits with the description of the situation. The writer described the boat heading down the face of the wave, the bow striking the next wave and stopping the boat, except the back of the boat kept coming, broaching the hull.
> >
> > Don
>
> I am not sure that the bluntness of the transomed bow increases the
> risk broaching due to its bluntness. When I look at designs intended
> for bar crossing or inlet running, they all seem to have in common the
> character of plenty of reserve buoyancy in the bow. This, I deduce,
> is intended to allow the bow to float high upon encountering the
> backside of a wave when surfing.
>
> (Also, I see in the Inlet Running boats a converse, low reserve
> buoyancy in the stern; which also would help the bow to float high
> when encountering the backside of a wave.)
>
> In other words, I don't think the goal in avoiding broaches is for the
> bow to cut through the next wave, but rather it is for the bow to rise
> up when it hits the backside of the next wave. I think it is
> misguided to point to "the bow stopping the boat", and if anything a
> transomed bow would have better reserve buoyancy characteristics than
> a knife edge bow.
>

On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 6:15 PM, daschultz2000
<daschultz8275@...> wrote:

>
>
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, BruceHallman <hallman@...> wrote:
> >
> > I believe that broaching is most often caused by a displacement hull
> > exceeding its hull speed. Perhaps what happened is that the hull
> > surfed down the face of one wave and gained too much speed?
> >
>
> Yes. That fits with the description of the situation. The writer described the boat heading down the face of the wave, the bow striking the next wave and stopping the boat, except the back of the boat kept coming, broaching the hull.
>
> Don

I am not sure that the bluntness of the transomed bow increases the
risk broaching due to its bluntness. When I look at designs intended
for bar crossing or inlet running, they all seem to have in common the
character of plenty of reserve buoyancy in the bow. This, I deduce,
is intended to allow the bow to float high upon encountering the
backside of a wave when surfing.

(Also, I see in the Inlet Running boats a converse, low reserve
buoyancy in the stern; which also would help the bow to float high
when encountering the backside of a wave.)

In other words, I don't think the goal in avoiding broaches is for the
bow to cut through the next wave, but rather it is for the bow to rise
up when it hits the backside of the next wave. I think it is
misguided to point to "the bow stopping the boat", and if anything a
transomed bow would have better reserve buoyancy characteristics than
a knife edge bow.

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, BruceHallman <hallman@...> wrote:

>
> I believe that broaching is most often caused by a displacement hull
> exceeding its hull speed. Perhaps what happened is that the hull
> surfed down the face of one wave and gained too much speed?
>

Yes. That fits with the description of the situation. The writer described the boat heading down the face of the wave, the bow striking the next wave and stopping the boat, except the back of the boat kept coming, broaching the hull.

Don

On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 4:01 PM, daschultz2000
<daschultz8275@...> wrote:

> The other one that I read about made it clear the flat bow struck the next wave, and the boat immediately broached.

I believe that broaching is most often caused by a displacement hull
exceeding its hull speed. Perhaps what happened is that the hull
surfed down the face of one wave and gained too much speed?

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, BruceHallman <hallman@...> wrote:

>
> Fascinating, two reports of capsized Old Shoes?! Wow.
>

The other one that I read about made it clear the flat bow struck the next wave, and the boat immediately broached. Something one will need to avoid with that design. Perhaps the Old Shoe, because of its length/beam and even the mizzen is prone to that behavior even in a coastal situation. And perhaps the whole family of flat bowed ASxx's can demonstrate that behavior if they are in just the right situation for a particular hull.

But if that were so, it seems like the Micro at least would have a reputation for the behavior by now since there are many of them.

I was pushing her pretty hard :-)

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, BruceHallman <hallman@...> wrote:
>
> Fascinating, two reports of capsized Old Shoes?! Wow.
>

Fascinating, two reports of capsized Old Shoes?!  Wow.

I devised an insignia for my Oldshoe which any builder is welcome to copy. See these links which also include some photos of my boat:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bolger6/photos/album/34627054/pic/list
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bolger/photos/album/1657882815/pic/list

Insignia material is available from a sail maker and is about one foot long (appropriately). Make one for each side. See photos. I wonder if Duckworks sell it?

I knocked mine down once due to a sudden gust and inattention to the sheet. It took one cup of water over the rail and came right back up. Learned to always keep the sheet in hand so I can instantly pop it out on the clam cleat.

Hi Joe & David, thanks!

David,

When I knocked her down it was mostly (totally) due to my inexperience with the rig. I was headed (nearly surfing..)downwind and didn't have the mizzen squared out. In the next gust, the boat started to round up pretty hard and before I could release the sheets she went over.

It didn't feel like she'd go all the way bottom up, she seemed pretty stable on her side but I didn't follow the plan in regards to the holes through the "stowage bin" bulkhead under the cockpit seats. Those areas were made watertight accessed by deckplates only.

Did your boat fill with water through the storage bin and up under the cockpit seats? Probably a gasket on the storage bin hatch and some positive latching wouldn't hurt.

I was able to par-buckle her upright pretty easily by taking a line across the rail athwartships and pulling down on the line as I pushed my feet against the keel. I was a little surprised I couldn't just pop her back up by pulling down on the keel. She seemed like she'd almost go, just not quite enough leverage. Maybe under "ideal" conditions...but who capsizes under ideal conditions :-)

I've practiced re-boarding her from the water. It's a hell of a lot easier without the motor on...

I've seen some pics of your boat David, she looks Great!

Best!
Tom

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "David" <dir_cobb@...> wrote:
>
> Tom
>
> I could not agree more. Oldshoe is great, relaxed and safe feeling. My daughter will sail with me in her but not in other boats (yet).
>
> I am filling the opening in the bow transom as I have scooped a lot of water through it (specially in motorboat chop) and have never (yet)required it as a step
>
> I have no complaints and much praise.
>
> The warning I can give is that on the only occasion I have capsized her (my fault, not hers), she turned turtle completely (i.e. did not end up resting on her side)and it needed two adults to get her up again as you have very little leverage with the shallow full keel. I expect that IF I had released the main mast I would have got her over more easily. (I would probably have lost it, as the wind was blowing extremely hard at that stage.
>
>
>
> David
> Santiago, Chile
>
>
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Joe T" <scsbmsjoe@> wrote:
> >
> > Bravo Tom. Excellent report. My experience as well. Built mine in 1988 when Elrow Laroe was selling the first plans.
> >
> > Joe T
> >
> > --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "tfpainter1422" <tfpainter1422@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Some thoughts on the "Oldshoe" 7/24/2011
> > > ...
> >
>

Tom

I could not agree more. Oldshoe is great, relaxed and safe feeling. My daughter will sail with me in her but not in other boats (yet).

I am filling the opening in the bow transom as I have scooped a lot of water through it (specially in motorboat chop) and have never (yet)required it as a step

I have no complaints and much praise.

The warning I can give is that on the only occasion I have capsized her (my fault, not hers), she turned turtle completely (i.e. did not end up resting on her side)and it needed two adults to get her up again as you have very little leverage with the shallow full keel. I expect that IF I had released the main mast I would have got her over more easily. (I would probably have lost it, as the wind was blowing extremely hard at that stage.



David
Santiago, Chile

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Joe T" <scsbmsjoe@...> wrote:
>
> Bravo Tom. Excellent report. My experience as well. Built mine in 1988 when Elrow Laroe was selling the first plans.
>
> Joe T
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "tfpainter1422" <tfpainter1422@> wrote:
> >
> > Some thoughts on the "Oldshoe" 7/24/2011
> > ...
>

Bravo Tom. Excellent report. My experience as well. Built mine in 1988 when Elrow Laroe was selling the first plans.

Joe T

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "tfpainter1422" <tfpainter1422@...> wrote:
>
> Some thoughts on the "Oldshoe" 7/24/2011
> ...

Some thoughts on the "Oldshoe" 7/24/2011


I built a Bolger "Oldshoe" over the fall/winter of 2010/11. The Oldshoe is an 11'7" x 5'1" flat-bottomed box sharpie with a long, shallow ballast keel and cat-yawl rig. I used marine Meranti plywood and solid Douglas Fir for the spars & framing. Some red oak was used for the tiller, wales, motor pad, and misc. trim. The exterior is sheathed with 6oz glass set in epoxy. All joints were made with epoxy and the appropriate thixotropic additives with very few mechanical fasteners left in the boat. All endgrain was epoxy coated but none of the interior surfaces were. Paint was just good quality exterior latex and some cheap ablative paint for the bottom. All told she used up about $3000USD including new professionally made sails, used outboard, and used trailer. That figure includes EVERYTHING we like to forget counting...latex gloves, tape, brushes, abrasives, minor tooling....etc. Based on the receipts, I bought the plywood near the end of 9/10 and was buying paint by 12/10. I suspect an experienced builder could have one ready to launch in 3mo give or take, working nights and weekends. A well equipped shop and an place inside to build her are a tremendous boost to productivity. "Backyard" boatbuilding always takes longer having to work around the weather no matter how skilled one is...


Sailing

I think I launched her sometime in May and have been sailing her nearly everyday since.

Initially, she was a bit difficult to handle in puffy conditions and it took me a little while to figure out why. Essentially, the problem was that I had made the mast too thick/stiff. I don't remember why I didn't just follow the spar plan exactly....but for some reason, I shaped the main mast with a parabolic taper...maybe because the curve looked better to my eye... Anyway, this was a mistake. The resulting mast was (way) too stiff and did not flex enough to depower the main in sudden gusts resulting in handling that was less than elegant and required instant release of the main sheet to avoid a capsize. After some more research, and chats with Michael Storer and Ross Lillistone, I plucked the mast off the boat and shaved it down to exactly what Phil had drawn on the plan. The resulting transformation in the boat's personality with the (correctly linear tapered) mast is nothing short of astonishing. She is totally docile and well mannered in any reasonable weather (and I've had her out in gusts up to 28 knots, reefed). In a sharp gust working upwind the main mast will flex and the boat will start to round-up. The difference is she will do this very smoothly giving the helmsman plenty of warning to ease the sheet or feather.

The cat-yawl rig is delightful and extremely useful. In any reasonable wind speed the the helm can be balanced perfectly by starting the mizzen sheet when weather helm builds up. When reefed in stronger winds the balance can be maintained the same way. Off the wind a bit, the mizzen can be eased to allow her to maintain her course with no tiller input. The limiting factor being boat trim. She's a tiny boat, and is pretty sensitive to passenger weight placement in regards to sail balance...not stability.

In regards to stability, she seems good to 45 degrees or so after which she'll go over pretty quickly to land high on her side. The boat likes to be sailed pretty much bolt upright so 45 degrees is a long way off and you should have plenty of warning.


Pros, Cons, and Limitations

I'll just try to give my honest assessment without too much hyperbole. She's an in-shore, protected water boat. The first limitation is wave action. In waves that approach hitting the flat bow transom, I think she'd have trouble making headway. I have not tried her under these conditions, and I'd really rather not. I wouldn't say that this makes her useless...there are plenty of perfectly delightful lakes, streams, slow moving rivers, and coastal areas where she'd be a ton of fun and safe to use. As always, match the boat with its intended use. She'd shine especially in areas susceptible to strong breezes but with insufficient fetch to develop significant waves. The second limitation would be the skipper...or maybe the first if one is foolish enough to use her in open sea areas. She feels like she can conquer the world sitting in the cockpit, but that could lead to a false sense of security for the unwary.

She is not a ghoster by any means. In light fickle winds under 3 knots she's pretty dull. She'll move in any kind of air, but won't point well. Combine very light air with a random mess of powerboat wakes and you'll have a perfect recipe for misery (true of most tiny beamy boats, not just the Oldshoe). In very light conditions there is an insufficient mass of moving air to force the sail into the sprit boom resulting in a sail shape that won't point much beyond a beam reach on the bad tack. While the Oldshoe wallows, a Laser will literally sail circles around her.

Now some good stuff. As a design, I think she is a wonderful bit of engineering elegance. She is very beautiful to me in that way, amazing boat for 8 sheets of plywood and a couple months work. In wind speeds from 8-15 knots single handed under full sail she feels great, I dare say exhilarating charging along at a whopping 4 knots :-) She'll point fairly well (50 degrees or so) and is totally docile and relaxed. She feels like a much larger boat, not the little sailing dinghy she is. As we get over 15 knots singlehanded, I put in the reef. Not so much for the 15-18 but the possibility of a gust over 20. The amount of weight in the boat makes a big difference, as you might suspect, and she can carry full sail safely in higher wind speeds with a full load. I can sail a Laser for about a half and hour before it becomes terribly uncomfortable for me. Not just the physical contortions but the sharp mental focus required keep a Laser on her feet. I can sail the Oldshoe all day and into the night with a near comatose state of mind and in total comfort.

I think that's were she shines best. She's a boat for entertaining, for relaxing with friends, having some good conversation and taking in the scenery. With the boat very nearly taking care of herself with very little input from the skipper, conversations go on uninterrupted, maybe someone shifts over to the weather side in mid-sentence if the wind builds a little. No one is hanging over the rail and no beverages are spilled. Stress factor negative.

Tom