Re: [bolger] Re: Cartopper sailboat

That's certainly an advantage of leeboards, as you're learning with your
new boat. <g> But Cartopper's centerboard is stuck up forward where it
doesn't get in the way so much, and you wouldn't want to stick people in
the ends of the boat anyway. Cartopper is laid out with floorboards only
in the middle part of the boat, to encourage the crew to stay where they
belong.

On Fri, 12 Aug 2011 01:15:01 -0700, Mark A wrote:

>
>>
>> So what would be the advantage of leeboards on
>> Cartopper?
>>
>
> Maybe they hoped there'd be more room in the boat.

--
John (jkohnen@...)
The trouble with the school of experience is that the graduates
are too old to go to work. (Henry Ford)

I'm sure you could.

I'm sure you could add to these few quickies: simplicity, lightness, cheapness, space (allowing roomier forward chamber, aft chamber, lie down between - this also allowing improved flooded righting bouyancy)...

It wasn't a "why" type query though. It was a "has it ever been done?" type query - more like a "why not?"

PS. I'm not a huge fan of old ANW, and I've a suspicion that PCB wouldn't have been either.

"Seek simplicity, and distrust it." Alfred North Whitehead

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "John Kohnen" <jhkohnen@...> wrote:
>
> Nobody has mentioned WHY one would want to put a leeboard or two on a Cartopper. As designed, the centerboard is stuck way up forward, pretty much out of the way. So what would be the advantage of leeboards on Cartopper?
>
> --
> John (jkohnen@...)
> "Necessity is the mother of invention" is a silly proverb.
> "Necessity is the mother of futile dodges" is much nearer the
> truth. (Alfred North Whitehead)
>

That's easy.

Positioning, sizing, and arrangement of leeway resisting boards for small boats.

Positioning, weighing, and arrangement of "Bolger's rules as stated, and Bolger Rules of course unsaid."

The above in context of ill founded early replies indicating unworkability of any alternative board consideration as raised by OP, such as, for example: "Probably not. The center board is so far forward in Cartopper it would be hard to mount a leeboard similarly and still have it parallel to to he center line. Putting the board amidships would destroy the balance between sail, fin and rudder."; and "I agree with Mark. Not a good idea to substitute a leeboard on a hull designed for a centerboard. Mr. Bolger explains why in two or three articles I have read, but can't locate one off-hand.". There's that, and the liberating ever present instructive implications of what PCB actually wrote, and drew, from time to time - those for the consideration of the OP, whose query suggests they too are neither fundamentalist, nor hidebound when it comes to small boats.

interrogate the bolger chart,
every phrase, every mark...

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "prairiedog2332" <arvent@...> wrote:
>
> Totally agree that SpurII is a superior row boat. Totally agree that
> Pirogue is a great design, and I have the plans. Not sure what that
> has to do with the thread subject?

>
> So what would be the advantage of leeboards on
> Cartopper?
>

Maybe they hoped there'd be more room in the boat.

I assumed the original questioner was perhaps considering it might save
the complication of building the centerboard case.

And had no idea it would get that many response:-)

Nels (outta here now)

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "John Kohnen" <jhkohnen@...> wrote:
>
> Nobody has mentioned WHY one would want to put a leeboard or two on a
> Cartopper. As designed, the centerboard is stuck way up forward,
pretty
> much out of the way. So what would be the advantage of leeboards on
> Cartopper?
>
> --
> John (jkohnen@...)
> "Necessity is the mother of invention" is a silly proverb.
> "Necessity is the mother of futile dodges" is much nearer the
> truth. (Alfred North Whitehead)
>

Totally agree that SpurII is a superior row boat. Totally agree that
Pirogue is a great design, and I have the plans. Not sure what that has
to do with the thread subject?

Nels

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "c.ruzer" <c.ruzer@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "prairiedog2332" arvent@ wrote:
> > (snipped)
> > It would be fairly easy to compare how a leeboard would work if...
>
> > There are plans and a description for an add-on leeboard in BWAOM
> > pages 50-51...
>
> > It might be even be more instructional to build a cheap polytarp
> > sprit sail...
>
> > This sail has a lower aspect ratio and the CE is lower and further
> > aft than the LOM sprit boom standard Bolger/Payson rig...
>
> (As designed both rigs locate the COA similarly for Cartopper)
>
> > This way one could compare the sailing capabilities...
>
> > This set-up could be used on almost any small hull to try out
> > sailing it, such as on any store bought canoe or kayak for
> > example. Probably even a smaller sail with shorter spars would be
> > preferable if the chosen hull was narrower than Cartopper...
>
>
> PCB calls that combo leeboard-thwart of Spur II "awkward". It is. Yet
Spur II will sail with it "respectably". And yet that nicety is merely
an add-on to what has been described in WB as the best rowboat ever.
EVER. They're often put together, not great rowboats with respectable
sailing that is, but the aforementioned "clumsy" with "awkward"!
>
> However, note where the leeboard is placed on Spur II: at the maximum
WLB.
>
> We could try narrower, with smaller polytarp sail and shorter spars?
Pointy boats without breadth carried far forward, with clumsy projecting
leeboard bearings - "clumsy" boats you say? Well, I never... (gasp)!
>
> Yet, similar to Spur II, a 90 degree bracketed leeboard was designed
earlier for Pirogue #451. The thwart function of it in the Spur II
design is done away with, and shortened to a horizontal piece to locate
on and quickly fasten onto one side deck only.
>
> I believe PCB was quite happy with all aspects of Pirogue #451. That
includes sailing. Happy enough for it to be a Common Sense Design, yet
look closer.
>
> Look at the wedge shape bearings neccessary for holding the leeboard
to the hull in proper alignment - "a clumsy projection" given the
considerations disclosed re Japanese Beach Cruiser, no? More so, look
how far toward the bow it's located, and at the resultant water flow
wedging adjacent the hull there. Moreover this is a sharper bowed hull
than Cartopper! Also it has widest WLB a fair way aft of mid WLL, and
COB also beyond the PCB sailboat usual of 60% aft. Nevertheless I think
#451 may still fairly be described as a brilliant, elegant simplicity,
one of uncommon sense. "Clumsy" is as clumsy does, but it can do. It's
not necessarily Instant Boat Death.
>
> ~ ___/) ~~~
>
>
> Rosencrantz: Do you think death could possibly be a boat?
>
> Guildenstern: No, no, no...Death is...not. Death isn't. You take my
> meaning. Death is the ultimate negative. Not-being. You
> can't not-be on a boat.
>
> Rosencrantz: I've frequently not been on boats.
>
> Guildenstern: No, no, no - what you've been is not on boats.
>
> "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead" - Tom Stoppard (1937 -)
>

Nobody has mentioned WHY one would want to put a leeboard or two on a
Cartopper. As designed, the centerboard is stuck way up forward, pretty
much out of the way. So what would be the advantage of leeboards on
Cartopper?

--
John (jkohnen@...)
"Necessity is the mother of invention" is a silly proverb.
"Necessity is the mother of futile dodges" is much nearer the
truth. (Alfred North Whitehead)

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "prairiedog2332" <arvent@...> wrote:

> (snipped)
> It would be fairly easy to compare how a leeboard would work if...

> There are plans and a description for an add-on leeboard in BWAOM
> pages 50-51...

> It might be even be more instructional to build a cheap polytarp
> sprit sail...

> This sail has a lower aspect ratio and the CE is lower and further
> aft than the LOM sprit boom standard Bolger/Payson rig...

(As designed both rigs locate the COA similarly for Cartopper)

> This way one could compare the sailing capabilities...

> This set-up could be used on almost any small hull to try out
> sailing it, such as on any store bought canoe or kayak for
> example. Probably even a smaller sail with shorter spars would be
> preferable if the chosen hull was narrower than Cartopper...

PCB calls that combo leeboard-thwart of Spur II "awkward". It is. Yet Spur II will sail with it "respectably". And yet that nicety is merely an add-on to what has been described in WB as the best rowboat ever. EVER. They're often put together, not great rowboats with respectable sailing that is, but the aforementioned "clumsy" with "awkward"!

However, note where the leeboard is placed on Spur II: at the maximum WLB.

We could try narrower, with smaller polytarp sail and shorter spars? Pointy boats without breadth carried far forward, with clumsy projecting leeboard bearings - "clumsy" boats you say? Well, I never... (gasp)!

Yet, similar to Spur II, a 90 degree bracketed leeboard was designed earlier for Pirogue #451. The thwart function of it in the Spur II design is done away with, and shortened to a horizontal piece to locate on and quickly fasten onto one side deck only.

I believe PCB was quite happy with all aspects of Pirogue #451. That includes sailing. Happy enough for it to be a Common Sense Design, yet look closer.

Look at the wedge shape bearings neccessary for holding the leeboard to the hull in proper alignment - "a clumsy projection" given the considerations disclosed re Japanese Beach Cruiser, no? More so, look how far toward the bow it's located, and at the resultant water flow wedging adjacent the hull there. Moreover this is a sharper bowed hull than Cartopper! Also it has widest WLB a fair way aft of mid WLL, and COB also beyond the PCB sailboat usual of 60% aft. Nevertheless I think #451 may still fairly be described as a brilliant, elegant simplicity, one of uncommon sense. "Clumsy" is as clumsy does, but it can do. It's not necessarily Instant Boat Death.

~ ___/) ~~~


Rosencrantz: Do you think death could possibly be a boat?

Guildenstern: No, no, no...Death is...not. Death isn't. You take my
meaning. Death is the ultimate negative. Not-being. You
can't not-be on a boat.

Rosencrantz: I've frequently not been on boats.

Guildenstern: No, no, no - what you've been is not on boats.

"Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead" - Tom Stoppard (1937 -)

It would be fairly easy to compare how a leeboard would work if one had
access to a completed Cartopper say by attending the Sail Oklahoma
Messabout and talking to Mike Monies:-)

There are plans and a description for an add-on leeboard in BWAOM pages
50-51. It is simply a board/thwart the same width as the leeboard which
is permanently attached vertically to it. The thwart has a hole drilled
through the forward corner at each end through which a loop of line
passes and ties to each gunnel at your chosen location. This allows the
leeboard to kick back and up if encountering any underwater obstruction.

It might be even be more instructional to build a cheap polytarp sprit
sail with the instructions that come with Cartopper as an option shown
on page 26. This sail has a lower aspect ratio and the CE is lower and
further aft than the LOM sprit boom standard Bolger/Payson rig. One
would be maybe forced to sail while sitting on the bottom since the foot
of this sail is lower as well. It might add to stability this way and
also the spars are shorter (9' 6" mast) and store more easily.

This way one could compare the sailing capabilities first with the
standard Cartopper with centerboard and LOM and then this option. You
could also make and exchange a smaller rudder blade if the the standard
one seems too powerful.

Bolger mentions as well that when reaching in deeper water, one could
straddle the thwart and hike out more comfortably than sitting on a
narrow gunnel.

This set-up could be used on almost any small hull to try out sailing
it, such as on any store bought canoe or kayak for example. Probably
even a smaller sail with shorter spars would be preferable if the chosen
hull was narrower than Cartopper. One would also have the option of just
steering with a paddle fixed with another loop of line near the stern.

Nels

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Mark Albanese <marka97203@...> wrote:
>
> (Neither attaching nor sending a message to the group upon upload
> seemed working this time. Sorry/ )
>
>
>
> The sketch w/ instantboat leeboard is in here.
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bolger/files/Temporary/
>
> I think the mast would have to tilt quite a lot to get it all back in
> line. Watch out for the rudder head!
> Correct, Elephant Ears are just the way to go. They'd give the most
> latitude to make adjustments on the fly.
>

(Neither attaching nor sending a message to the group upon upload
seemed working this time. Sorry/ )



The sketch w/ instantboat leeboard is in here.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bolger/files/Temporary/

I think the mast would have to tilt quite a lot to get it all back in
line. Watch out for the rudder head!
Correct, Elephant Ears are just the way to go. They'd give the most
latitude to make adjustments on the fly.

Yes. He often encouraged it by even critically supporting suggested changes although he often as not condemned them too. One proviso was that, if built different to plan, a boat shouldn't be called his design.
Ah, but the thought experimenting, the provocation, the boat dreaming, the armchair journeys in boat design, that; that was valueable too.

"We are supposed to be having fun, are we not?"

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, L <lew_clayman@...> wrote:

> It's fascinating, isn't it?  Preserving the work of a great man intact surely honors his legacy, but when the man in question was a great experimenter, does it not also honor his legacy to keep experimenting?

It is worth noticing that Cartopper, (as with Dart dingy, St. Vallary,
and perhaps a few others I am forgetting) were Bolger innovations
where he experimented with the largely unconventional idea of having a
large part of the lateral plane of the boat located in the rudder.
Because of this, the center board is located oddly forward (compared
with conventional boats, and compared with 'normal' leeboards).

> PCB observed the boat shape made leeboards a more clumsy option than
> usual. How so? The arrangement for slinging top slung leeboards
> would be a bit more problematical than other leeboard types, "never
> grudge (sic) the neighbours a laugh" (You know, Red Zinger guest
> bedrooms!), but they would also serve under sail - so what's the
> problem with shape?
>
> Is it the outside boat shape, or the inside?
>
> I think it was the inside shape that PCB was thinking of.
>
> Clutter. Limits to useable space and function.

So there I was brought up clumsily yet again by shoal draft boats beside Bolger depths, and I thought "check the lay of the Pirate Racer leeboards for rope slung elephant ears. Racers aren't usually clumsy". But I thought "a Japanese Beach Cruiser might be a better course" because there's elephant ear leeboards, and similar to Cartopper, more than one chine. So, matching up the plan views of their curving gunnels I thought "struth, there's not much between them", and there isn't, and they don't look particularly clumsy. The sweep of their curves in plan view about where a leeboard is placed are much of a muchness, so "if rope slung elephant ear leeboards are good enough for the JBC", I thought, "why aren't they just as good for the Cartopper?" One answer, by way of the breadth farther forward allowed by a pram bow, Bolger had noted was that "a leeboarder needs to carry her breadth farther forward than is usual in centreboarders..." Why? Already marked: "to get bearings for the boards without a clumsy projection of the leebard guards." I wondered "does this mean that Pirate Racer is deceptively clumsy for a racing advantage?"

interrogate, interrogate the bolger chart,
every phrase, every mark...

How's that leeboard looking now?

Still no sketch through at this end.

The thing though, for the OP query, is not how it looks, but how it works. Does it look like the working is clumsy? That might depend on the leeboard type to a greater or lessor degree, as of course the looks will to. Anyway, is clumsy "looking" as "clumsy" does, or does clumsy look that way because it "is"?

Often ornateness goes with greatness;
Oftener felicity comes of simplicity.
— William Watson, Art Maxims

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Mark Albanese <marka97203@...> wrote:
>
> Just so. I put the leeboard at the widest part of the beam where it
> belongs. The sail's CE relationship to the board is the result.
>
> On Aug 8, 2011, at 3:35 AM, John Huft wrote:
>
> > I think you have the lee board too far aft. All of Michalak's
> > designs have the CE lining up just forward of the aft edge of the
> > lee board.
> > John Boy
> >
> >
> >
> > Happy sails to you, until we sail again
> > Happy sails to you, keep sailing until then...
>

Yes, if you were keeping it and the rudder the same size... but siting a leeboard there way toward the bow is problematical. The answer is to size the underwater foils conventionally and place the leeboard in the conventional location. The sail location is ok, if it's just raked aft slightly little more than shown. It also may be just fine if stepped abutting the aft face of frame 'A' which might then be made as a bulkhead to a full height bow bouyancy/storage chamber.

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

> If you were to replace the
> centerboard with leeboard, the leeboard would need to be roughly in
> the same place as the centerboard, or the sail would need to be
> moved aft.



--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, BruceHallman <hallman@...> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 3:35 AM, John Huft <t1ro2003@...> wrote:
> >
> > I think you have the lee board too far aft.
>
> I agree.
>
> The thing to remember is that the underwater lateral plane comes
> both from the leeboard or centerboard plus the rudder.So, the
> center of lateral plane falls at a balance point between the two.
> Bolger put a
> rather large rudder on the Cartopper design so that he could locate
> the swinging centerboard a good distance forward in the boat. (which
> frees up usable space in the cockpit). If you were to replace the
> centerboard with leeboard, the leeboard would need to be roughly in
> the same place as the centerboard, or the sail would need to be
> moved aft.
>

There are rules, if it's to work.

There are rules if it works (and even if it don't).

There's Bolger's rules as stated, and Bolger rules of course unsaid.

Many appropriate tried and tested rules collected herehttp://home.clara.net/gmatkin/therules.htmby Gavin. Google will link lots more info on rules.

I indicated more or less per published Bolger how and why what might so easily apply to Cartopper. Make that rudder immersed area about 2% of sail area. Make that leeboard immersed area about 4% of sail area, if its single then make it long enough overall in this case to account for heeling, etc.

(did you attach a sketch? if so it didn't come through here)

Why move the mast a foot to the rear? You can cant it.


interrogate the bolger chart,
every phrase, every mark...

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Mark Albanese <marka97203@...> wrote:
>
> Being one of them Ignorati myself, can you please show the center
> of lateral plane here?

> I don't think anyone meant to say a dedicated tinkerer couldn't do
> it. There are no rules, after all. Getting it right could be a time
> consuming and frustrating affair though. I added a generic instant
> boat leeboard. Make the rudder smaller? By how much? And again,
> move the mast a foot to the rear and the interior space will
> suffer.
> Mark

Here is a link from MAIB where Catfish was discussed, including a brief
mention of a "Birdwatcher-type house", which is what I had in mind.

http://www.messingaboutinboats.com/archives/mbissuejuly00.html

Photos of TUMAFISH here.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bolger/files/Catfish%20Beachcruiser/

Built by John Tuma and an excellent job of building. The second photo
shows the interior arrangement that had a lot of people confused when
the saw it.

Nels

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Bill Howard <billh39@...> wrote:
>
> I am building a 1/8 scale model of Catfish, preparatory to building
the full size boat.
>
> My only other full size boat building experience is Bolger/Dynamite's
June Bug, a much simpler build with much more detailed instructions.
>
> The model may take another six months; one has to scale some
dimensions, e.g., boom and gaff dimensions (1 1/2 x 2 cross section???)
and guess how to cut out and assemble the open frames. Pictures in
Dynamite's Instant Boatbuilding are a great help.
>
> Lotsa ways to make errors, and therefore more fun to get it done.
>
> Bill Howard
> Nellysford VA
>
> On Aug 8, 2011, at 6:35 PM, prairiedog2332 wrote:
>
> > Re: Cartopper sailboat
> >
>
> > Dynamite ... in his final build book ... shows the plans for several
other Bolger designs. I am
> > particularly struck by Catfish as that bow shape reminds me so much
of
> > the big wood and canvas freighter canoes I often saw when working up
> > north in Canada. They sure cut a pretty picture in dark green with a
> > nice white bow wave in sunlit water.
> >
> > Wonder how it would look with a slightly taller raised deckhouse
with
> > slot top opening, something like the Chebacco (sheet version type
2)?
> > Only smaller and lighter and no centerboard to be concerned with.
Tent
> > over the slot to sleep inside. Or maybe just built open to the
gunnels,
> > like a big freighter canoe and have a bolt-on "truck cap" as an
option?
> > Just like Supermouse.
> >
> > It would be kind of a more traditional looking version of Camper 640
> > but having a 2 -4 hp 4-stroke instead of a double rowing station,
for
> > lazy people like myself. On the open lakes one could sail and then
motor
> > on the quiet stretches. Many of the portages up in northern
Saskatchewan
> > now have timber skidways to allow motorboats to be skidded over the
> > portage. Not sure if the shallow keel of Catfish would make it too
> > awkward, but it sure would look nice out on the water!
> >
> > Nels.
> >
> >
> >
>

I am building a 1/8 scale model of Catfish, preparatory to building the full size boat.

Dynamite ... in his final build book ... shows the plans for several other Bolger designs. I am
particularly struck by Catfish as that bow shape reminds me so much of
the big wood and canvas freighter canoes I often saw when working up
north in Canada. They sure cut a pretty picture in dark green with a
nice white bow wave in sunlit water.

Wonder how it would look with a slightly taller raised deckhouse with
slot top opening, something like the Chebacco (sheet version type 2)?
Only smaller and lighter and no centerboard to be concerned with. Tent
over the slot to sleep inside. Or maybe just built open to the gunnels,
like a big freighter canoe and have a bolt-on "truck cap" as an option?
Just like Supermouse.

It would be kind of a more traditional looking version of Camper 640
but having a 2 -4 hp 4-stroke instead of a double rowing station, for
lazy people like myself. On the open lakes one could sail and then motor
on the quiet stretches. Many of the portages up in northern Saskatchewan
now have timber skidways to allow motorboats to be skidded over the
portage. Not sure if the shallow keel of Catfish would make it too
awkward, but it sure would look nice out on the water!

Nels.

Notice nothing was changed in the fundamental design other than the deck
house, based on an existing design (Chebacco) and Catfish has already
been redesigned as an open boat- with a centerboard in fact. My
preference would be to leave out the centerboard for simplicity and the
likelihood of motoring more than sailing in the region mentioned.
Freighter canoes gave up the sailing option once the outboards became
the MO. But they also planed which this would not do so sailing becomes
viable again.

Nels

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Mark Albanese <marka97203@...> wrote:
>
> Some say true intelligence is being able to hold two contradictory
> ideas simultaneously. These boats of Philip Bolger's just inspire
> this kind of creativity.
> Martk
>
> On Aug 8, 2011, at 3:35 PM, prairiedog2332 wrote:
> > I don't quite fathom why somebody would pay $40 or more for boat
plans
> > and then turn the design into something the designer never
> > intended. Why
> > not just design you own?
> >
> > Wonder how it would look with a slightly taller raised deckhouse
with
> > slot top opening, something like the Chebacco (sheet version type
2)?
> > Only smaller and lighter and no centerboard to be concerned with.
Tent
> > over the slot to sleep inside. Or maybe just built open to the
> > gunnels,
> > like a big freighter canoe and have a bolt-on "truck cap" as an
> > option?
> > Just like Supermouse.
> >
> > I
>

Some say true intelligence is being able to hold two contradictory
ideas simultaneously. These boats of Philip Bolger's just inspire
this kind of creativity.
Martk

On Aug 8, 2011, at 3:35 PM, prairiedog2332 wrote:
> I don't quite fathom why somebody would pay $40 or more for boat plans
> and then turn the design into something the designer never
> intended. Why
> not just design you own?
>
> Wonder how it would look with a slightly taller raised deckhouse with
> slot top opening, something like the Chebacco (sheet version type 2)?
> Only smaller and lighter and no centerboard to be concerned with. Tent
> over the slot to sleep inside. Or maybe just built open to the
> gunnels,
> like a big freighter canoe and have a bolt-on "truck cap" as an
> option?
> Just like Supermouse.
>
> I

I don't quite fathom why somebody would pay $40 or more for boat plans
and then turn the design into something the designer never intended. Why
not just design you own?

BTW Dynamite has devoted 50 or so pages in his final build book to
building a Cartopper, including a model. Great detailed photos and
diagrams and instructions.

He also shows the plans for several other Bolger designs. I am
particularly struck by Catfish as that bow shape reminds me so much of
the big wood and canvas freighter canoes I often saw when working up
north in Canada. They sure cut a pretty picture in dark green with a
nice white bow wave in sunlit water.

Wonder how it would look with a slightly taller raised deckhouse with
slot top opening, something like the Chebacco (sheet version type 2)?
Only smaller and lighter and no centerboard to be concerned with. Tent
over the slot to sleep inside. Or maybe just built open to the gunnels,
like a big freighter canoe and have a bolt-on "truck cap" as an option?
Just like Supermouse.

It would be kind of a more traditional looking version of Camper 640
but having a 2 -4 hp 4-stroke instead of a double rowing station, for
lazy people like myself. On the open lakes one could sail and then motor
on the quiet stretches. Many of the portages up in northern Saskatchewan
now have timber skidways to allow motorboats to be skidded over the
portage. Not sure if the shallow keel of Catfish would make it too
awkward, but it sure would look nice out on the water!

Nels





Nels

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Mark Albanese <marka97203@...> wrote:
>
> Just so. I put the leeboard at the widest part of the beam where it
> belongs. The sail's CE relationship to the board is the result.
>
> On Aug 8, 2011, at 3:35 AM, John Huft wrote:
>
> > I think you have the lee board too far aft. All of Michalak's
> > designs have the CE lining up just forward of the aft edge of the
> > lee board.
> > John Boy
> >
> >
> >
> > Happy sails to you, until we sail again
> > Happy sails to you, keep sailing until then...
>

Just so. I put the leeboard at the widest part of the beam where it belongs. The sail's CE relationship to the board is the result.

On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 3:35 AM, John Huft <t1ro2003@...> wrote:

>
> I think you have the lee board too far aft.

I agree.

The thing to remember is that the underwater lateral plane comes both
from the leeboard or centerboard plus the rudder. So, the center of
lateral plane falls at a balance point between the two. Bolger put a
rather large rudder on the Cartopper design so that he could locate
the swinging centerboard a good distance forward in the boat. (which
frees up usable space in the cockpit). If you were to replace the
centerboard with leeboard, the leeboard would need to be roughly in
the same place as the centerboard, or the sail would need to be moved
aft.

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "prairiedog2332" <arvent@...> wrote:

>
> Bolger wrote this regarding Cartopper, page 25 of BWAOM.
>
> "The shape of the boat makes leeboards an even clumsier option than
> usual".

Numerous interpretations of this quote present themselves. Some covered already.

> Although he does not elaborate, I would tend to believe him:-)

"...absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." (Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection, Chapter 12, The Demon-Haunted World)

Argumentum ad Ignorantum. There's better. The quote may give a vague indication as to why Cartopper was not designed with any leeboard, but fails to rule out the easy application of any leeboard. It does not support the spurious aero-hydrodynamic grounds given the OP for ruling out any leeboard on this hull.

Bolger wrote this regarding Cartopper, page 25 of BWAOM.

"The shape of the boat makes leeboards an even clumsier option than
usual".

Although he does not elaborate, I would tend to believe him:-)

Nels

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "c.ruzer" <c.ruzer@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" mq@ wrote:
> >
> > Has anyone built this with a LeeBoard instead of a centerboard?
> > Rudder 59
> >
>
> I haven't heard of that, but there's not much reason to do with
sailing as to why it couldn't be built with a leeboard. This is similar
to the Gypsy leeboard question - with its own twist.
>
> The Cartopper widest beam at station 7 is almost at mid LOA. Maximum
beam is where the water flow for a short distance is as parallel as it
ever gets to the longitudinal hull centreline. Good.
>
> When upright, or heeled, the maximum beam is even closer to mid WLL,
and hull CLR. Better.
>
> In both optional sailplans COE is also shown as nearly above that
point of widest beam. Best.
>
> To acheive the ideal balance the verticle leeboard trailing edge
should be closely aligned with sail COE (some say directly inline - for
a single leeboard, if that's what's intended, don't stress too much here
as the relationships alter somewhat according to tack and heel). All
that's needed, if the board trailing edge is at station 7, or a little
abaft 7, is to cant the mast of either rig slightly aft by a small
amount by adjusting the partner/step.
>
> Alternatively, leave the sailplan as is, and site the board trailing
edge a little further forward between stations 7 and 6. Placing it there
is a little sub-optimal with respect to water flow as some additional
wedging will occur because the flow is more or less longitudinally
tangential to the curving hull whereas the board is parallel to the CL.
>
> The above mods seem easy enough for a fixed leeboard (lee-daggerboard)
that's either slotted through guards, or clipped on as in so many
instant and instant-like boats. There's no bulkhead or frame to take the
leeboard load on the topside strake where the board is to be located,
but the guards, and, perhaps uneccessarily, a strengthened gunnel will
support it. Anyway, the strake free span between frames is quite small
here.
>
> Clearly, Dynamite and PCB each had other fish to fry in considering
the cartopper design, so, for one thing, lee-daggerboards apparently
were ruled out, as were pivoting cantilevered leeboard types. One "fish"
could've been marketing. PCB observed the boat shape made leeboards a
more clumsy option than usual. How so? The arrangement for slinging top
slung leeboards would be a bit more problematical than other leeboard
types, "never grudge (sic) the neighbours a laugh", but they would also
serve under sail - so what's the problem with shape?
>
> Is it the outside boat shape, or the inside?
>
> I think it was the inside shape that PCB was thinking of.
>
> Clutter. Limits to useable space and function.
>
> Rope-slung leeboards, or lee-daggerboards: where do you store them on
this little boat when not deployed for sailing? Are they, or their
fitments an interference when rowing? Is their storage a problem when
camping in the boat? Is their storage a problem when cartopping? Does
the designed bow-centreboard present any of these problems? Does the
designed bow-centreboard also effectively grant the little boat a larger
shape inside? A pinned pivoting cantilevered leeboard may do similar,
but the bowboard is not much more in construction, and the marketing
less clumsy. And, the Cartopper bowboard was a fresh idea nicely shaping
up for this and further application.
>

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" <mq@...> wrote:

>
> Has anyone built this with a LeeBoard instead of a centerboard?
> Rudder 59
>

I haven't heard of that, but there's not much reason to do with sailing as to why it couldn't be built with a leeboard. This is similar to the Gypsy leeboard question - with its own twist.

The Cartopper widest beam at station 7 is almost at mid LOA. Maximum beam is where the water flow for a short distance is as parallel as it ever gets to the longitudinal hull centreline. Good.

When upright, or heeled, the maximum beam is even closer to mid WLL, and hull CLR. Better.

In both optional sailplans COE is also shown as nearly above that point of widest beam. Best.

To acheive the ideal balance the verticle leeboard trailing edge should be closely aligned with sail COE (some say directly inline - for a single leeboard, if that's what's intended, don't stress too much here as the relationships alter somewhat according to tack and heel). All that's needed, if the board trailing edge is at station 7, or a little abaft 7, is to cant the mast of either rig slightly aft by a small amount by adjusting the partner/step.

Alternatively, leave the sailplan as is, and site the board trailing edge a little further forward between stations 7 and 6. Placing it there is a little sub-optimal with respect to water flow as some additional wedging will occur because the flow is more or less longitudinally tangential to the curving hull whereas the board is parallel to the CL.

The above mods seem easy enough for a fixed leeboard (lee-daggerboard) that's either slotted through guards, or clipped on as in so many instant and instant-like boats. There's no bulkhead or frame to take the leeboard load on the topside strake where the board is to be located, but the guards, and, perhaps uneccessarily, a strengthened gunnel will support it. Anyway, the strake free span between frames is quite small here.

Clearly, Dynamite and PCB each had other fish to fry in considering the cartopper design, so, for one thing, lee-daggerboards apparently were ruled out, as were pivoting cantilevered leeboard types. One "fish" could've been marketing. PCB observed the boat shape made leeboards a more clumsy option than usual. How so? The arrangement for slinging top slung leeboards would be a bit more problematical than other leeboard types, "never grudge (sic) the neighbours a laugh", but they would also serve under sail - so what's the problem with shape?

Is it the outside boat shape, or the inside?

I think it was the inside shape that PCB was thinking of.

Clutter. Limits to useable space and function.

Rope-slung leeboards, or lee-daggerboards: where do you store them on this little boat when not deployed for sailing? Are they, or their fitments an interference when rowing? Is their storage a problem when camping in the boat? Is their storage a problem when cartopping? Does the designed bow-centreboard present any of these problems? Does the designed bow-centreboard also effectively grant the little boat a larger shape inside? A pinned pivoting cantilevered leeboard may do similar, but the bowboard is not much more in construction, and the marketing less clumsy. And, the Cartopper bowboard was a fresh idea nicely shaping up for this and further application.

Some boats are better for it than others. I'd think there'd be a chance with aPelican, for instance, keeping the fin pretty close amidships. The reasonCartopperis a particularly poor candidate is that the rudder is supposed to take on a large proportion of lateral plane.

Hi Mike,

I agree with Mark. Not a good idea to substitute a leeboard on a hull
designed for a centerboard. Mr. Bolger explains why in two or three
articles I have read, but can't locate one off-hand.

If you would like a design a bit sleeker than the Piccup Pram you might
consider Jim's Woobo which is the pickup extended 3 feet to a pointy bow
making it faster and more seaworthy.

It's worthwhile reading the write-up on it at any rate. A bit too heavy
to car top perhaps, although where I live folks routinely carry heavier
aluminum fishing skiffs around on their pick-ups. They have some pretty
innovative ways of loading and unloading them.

http://www.duckworksbbs.com/plans/jim/woobo/index.htm

Nels

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" <mq@...> wrote:
>
>
> Thanks Mark,
> I'll check that out.
> Mike
>
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Mark Albanese marka97203@ wrote:
> >
> > Mike,
> >
> > Probably not. The center board is so far forward in Cartopper it
> > would be hard to mount a leeboard similarly and still have it
> > parallel to to he center line. Putting the board amidships would
> > destroy the balance between sail, fin and rudder. Moving the sail
> > further back to match leaves you no place to sit.
> >
> > For a like boat with leeboard, see Jim Michalak's Piccup Pram.
> >http://www.duckworksbbs.com/plans/jim/piccup_pram/index.htm
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Aug 5, 2011, at 7:32 PM, Mike wrote:
> >
> > > Has anyone built this with a LeeBoard instead of a centerboard?
> > > Rudder 59
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Thanks Mark,
I'll check that out.
Mike

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Mark Albanese <marka97203@...> wrote:
>
> Mike,
>
> Probably not. The center board is so far forward in Cartopper it
> would be hard to mount a leeboard similarly and still have it
> parallel to to he center line. Putting the board amidships would
> destroy the balance between sail, fin and rudder. Moving the sail
> further back to match leaves you no place to sit.
>
> For a like boat with leeboard, see Jim Michalak's Piccup Pram.
>http://www.duckworksbbs.com/plans/jim/piccup_pram/index.htm
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 5, 2011, at 7:32 PM, Mike wrote:
>
> > Has anyone built this with a LeeBoard instead of a centerboard?
> > Rudder 59
> >
> >
>

Probably not. The center board is so far forward in Cartopper it would be hard to mount a leeboard similarly and still have it parallel to to he center line. Putting the board amidships would destroy the balance between sail, fin and rudder. Moving the sail further back to match leaves you no place to sit.

Has anyone built this with a LeeBoard instead of a centerboard?
Rudder 59