Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat/ BUG OUT Boat
Bug -Out Boat . See Water World. (the movie) All you need is the Exxon Valdez and a good bungee cord !
58:44 PM
Subject:Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat/ BUG OUT Boat
I am not sure about the point of any ‘bug-out’ boat, as you will continue to depend a bit on ‘civilization’ for certain basics.
“And then she said piously”...it it might be useful to do things locally that will reduce the fear of any need to leave for parts unknown, since helping out on serious local solutions might be a good redirect of likely plausible serious concerns before they become a dark-cloud level of fear to trigger the flight-reflex.
Whether in respective comics, short-stories, novels, sci-fi yarns, dystopian movies, or much less defensible as a form of semi-predictive art – the highly self-hyping ‘Doomsday-Industrial Complex’ - wherever (?!) we see both reflections of potentialities that would trigger the urge to ‘flee’, but usually also the aftermath – which by consequences of the doomsday’ scenario won’t be ‘Elysian Field’ either, meaning an existence quite likely brutish, nasty and likely short. So ‘bugging out’ may have you hope to ‘live longer’, but under what circumstances and to what odds ?!
However, assuming, that well-evolved personal perspectives indeed drive some folks’ quest for the ‘Bug-Out Boat’, for serious resilience in utter unpredictables, i.e. no more GPS/LORAN/AIS, inherently uncertain/hostile practices amongst surviving ‘boaters’, uncertain supplies-availability, a simple over-load-absorbing double-ended steel-hull motor-sailer might be one option, assuming you’d take insulation/condensation and thus internal hull-skin access seriously. You could integrate ‘citadel’-type hardened sections to huddle behind against modest-caliber small-arms fire. Such a hull could take all sorts of collisions and rough-encounters as you head ‘beyond Thunderdome’...past ‘Waterworld’.. towards the forced and unceremonious integration into the minion-forces of the Klingon Overlords.
Mind you, a Doomsday-Boat would not necessarily make the best cruiser now, since cruising amidst civilized parameters might allow a better approach towards ergonomics, safety/’sinking-resistance’, relative ecologically-responsible structure and propulsion etc.
But one example of an existing Bolger simple steel-shape might be Design #370, the single-chine modest vee-bilges SOLUTION-48 center-board motor-sailor, possibly just big enough for two to set up a survival-pod for the ‘aftermath’. This double-ended 48’ x 12’6” x 2’6” x 23,000lbs DWL, schooner or four-sided-sloop rigged hull, with modest 20-40hp diesel-power would require modest labor for the results. And with her shape, overloads are not immediately punishing, assuming it would be mostly down low.
Plans on 8 sheets (22”x34”) are listed at $ 700.- to build one boat, sent rolled in a tube.
As ever before in human history, the forecast seems full of ‘the usual’ challenges and opportunities to do better... with ultimately many of the details changing alright, but the basic need to find plausible constructive responses remaining more or less the same. And as Phil would laconically point out, “first and last there is no security in life” and that “we all need luck...” to get on with things.
Onwards...
Susanne Altenburger, PB&F
Susanne
If anybody knows the Bolger designs it would be you, M'am. Thank you for illuminating the subject for me, and thanks to the others who have shown a genuine interest in considering the attributes of #501. When I was looking for Sailing Houseboat Scows I also came across Tillicum, a Garden design.http://triloboats.blogspot.com/2011/12/tale-of-two-scows.html
I bought the book that contains some drawings, and according to Garden, Tillicum "can go anywhere", but is better suited as a coastal cruiser. It draws 24" as opposed to #501's 18", and has a center board/keel. Any thoughts about this vessel's suitability for long term, secure, and comfortable family living? With the ability to change locations under it's own power? Another thing that to me is of highest importance is the that the sailing houseboat has enough room to make for quality living. That is what #501, and Tillicum, have to offer. And of course shoal draft.
Susanne, do you have a recommendation for a suitable "bug-out" boat?
I have seen images of generations of Chinese living aboard junks, and there is some historical data on "The Sea Peoples", different tribes who escaped from hostile threats by taking to the sea for refuge. They grew in power and conquered parts of Egypt. The Dutch indeed have lived aboard houseboats and scows forever, but of course the idea of a bug-out boat is to search for safety in a relatively remote area away from threats.
I guess my qwest to develope a 'PROOF OF CONCEPT" is actually an attempt to collect emperical data on as many aspects, attribures, variables, and impediments to successful, and possibly prosperouse, long term survival in a "sailing houseboat". My interest in answering these questions may, possibly, be unique to me.
--- Inmailto:bolger%40yahoogroups.com, <philbolger@...> wrote:
>
> Or you could talk to me to find out what âelseâ might be available. Whether for Doomsday Scenaria, or just offshore and inshore cruising, or just living-aboard without much long-distance ambitions â" whichever particular angle (and they shift...) â" youâd want a rugged shallow-draft type that can sit more or less upright on the more or less level mud/sand, or do the Atlantic. And of that âpersuasionâ weâve done a few of in both wood and steel construction. With more doable !
>
> And there is indeed no reason to give up on high degrees of sinking-resistance as long as the design bears this attribute in mind since earliest concept-stages.
>
> Susanne Altenburger, PB&F
>
> From: Scot McPherson
> Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 2:41 PM
> To:mailto:bolger%40yahoogroups.com
> Cc:mailto:bolger%40yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
>
>
>
> My opinion and opinion only is if you are looking for a boat to live aboard and long term liveabosrd cruise with. Which is what an Armageddon boat really is, you need one of the overly sturdy designs. Boats designed to be beached for servicing rather than relying on docking facilities, and can be serviced by carving lumber out of a tree with an adze, hatchets and hand powers saws. For that you might want to look at bhueler designs.
>
> They are heavy and slow, but designed to live through hurricanes, and be beached for hull repairs.
>
> They are not unsinkable though. Unsinkable ships by their very design trade offs are not suitable blue water vessels, at least not for long trips.
>
> Scot McPherson, PMP CISSP MCSA
> Old Lyme, CT
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Aug 20, 2013, at 12:35 PM, "Peter" <pvanderwaart@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> > It is not so much to establish a PROOF of CONCEPT of the sailing scow,
> > but to prove that such a boat could be a permanent family shelter,
> > and can be moved to a new location under her own power if needed.
> > My vision was that in case of national emergency, or a disaster
> > of whatever origin, a family could be evacuated, and safely and
> > comfortably sheltered, by grounding on a beach or sitting on the
> > mud, working the tides.
>
> I'm not sure what you think needs proving. People have lived on boats for centuries. Like this:
>
>http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4137/4899292823_1f2c4cbcef_z.jpg
>
> Also barges in European canals, and numerous American cruisers, etc.
>
> It would be much quicker and possibly cheaper to get a down-at-the-heels, used, fiberglass cruiser, possibly a center cockpit sloop built for the charter trades. After a hose down, and delousing the mattresses, you can move aboard and refurbish the engine and rig at your leisure.
>
> Don't get me wrong; I'm a big fan of #501. It's a remarkably clever design, as you will find out if you try to make any facile changes. But it's not meant as a voyaging boat, and I doubt it's a good choice for out-running the apocalypse. PCB designed some other boats that would be better for that, but the requirements for going to see cause them to be more difficult to build.
>
I am not sure about the point of any ‘bug-out’ boat, as you will continue to depend a bit on ‘civilization’ for certain basics.
“And then she said piously”...it it might be useful to do things locally that will reduce the fear of any need to leave for parts unknown, since helping out on serious local solutions might be a good redirect of likely plausible serious concerns before they become a dark-cloud level of fear to trigger the flight-reflex.
Whether in respective comics, short-stories, novels, sci-fi yarns, dystopian movies, or much less defensible as a form of semi-predictive art – the highly self-hyping ‘Doomsday-Industrial Complex’ - wherever (?!) we see both reflections of potentialities that would trigger the urge to ‘flee’, but usually also the aftermath – which by consequences of the doomsday’ scenario won’t be ‘Elysian Field’ either, meaning an existence quite likely brutish, nasty and likely short. So ‘bugging out’ may have you hope to ‘live longer’, but under what circumstances and to what odds ?!
However, assuming, that well-evolved personal perspectives indeed drive some folks’ quest for the ‘Bug-Out Boat’, for serious resilience in utter unpredictables, i.e. no more GPS/LORAN/AIS, inherently uncertain/hostile practices amongst surviving ‘boaters’, uncertain supplies-availability, a simple over-load-absorbing double-ended steel-hull motor-sailer might be one option, assuming you’d take insulation/condensation and thus internal hull-skin access seriously. You could integrate ‘citadel’-type hardened sections to huddle behind against modest-caliber small-arms fire. Such a hull could take all sorts of collisions and rough-encounters as you head ‘beyond Thunderdome’...past ‘Waterworld’.. towards the forced and unceremonious integration into the minion-forces of the Klingon Overlords.
Mind you, a Doomsday-Boat would not necessarily make the best cruiser now, since cruising amidst civilized parameters might allow a better approach towards ergonomics, safety/’sinking-resistance’, relative ecologically-responsible structure and propulsion etc.
But one example of an existing Bolger simple steel-shape might be Design #370, the single-chine modest vee-bilges SOLUTION-48 center-board motor-sailor, possibly just big enough for two to set up a survival-pod for the ‘aftermath’. This double-ended 48’ x 12’6” x 2’6” x 23,000lbs DWL, schooner or four-sided-sloop rigged hull, with modest 20-40hp diesel-power would require modest labor for the results. And with her shape, overloads are not immediately punishing, assuming it would be mostly down low.
Plans on 8 sheets (22”x34”) are listed at $ 700.- to build one boat, sent rolled in a tube.
As ever before in human history, the forecast seems full of ‘the usual’ challenges and opportunities to do better... with ultimately many of the details changing alright, but the basic need to find plausible constructive responses remaining more or less the same. And as Phil would laconically point out, “first and last there is no security in life” and that “we all need luck...” to get on with things.
Onwards...
Susanne Altenburger, PB&F
Susanne
If anybody knows the Bolger designs it would be you, M'am.
Thank you for illuminating the subject for me, and thanks to the others who have
shown a genuine interest in considering the attributes of #501. When I was
looking for Sailing Houseboat Scows I also came across Tillicum, a Garden
design.http://triloboats.blogspot.com/2011/12/tale-of-two-scows.html
I
bought the book that contains some drawings, and according to Garden, Tillicum
"can go anywhere", but is better suited as a coastal cruiser. It draws 24" as
opposed to #501's 18", and has a center board/keel. Any thoughts about this
vessel's suitability for long term, secure, and comfortable family living? With
the ability to change locations under it's own power? Another thing that to me
is of highest importance is the that the sailing houseboat has enough room to
make for quality living. That is what #501, and Tillicum, have to offer. And of
course shoal draft.
Susanne, do you have a recommendation for a suitable
"bug-out" boat?
I have seen images of generations of Chinese living aboard
junks, and there is some historical data on "The Sea Peoples", different tribes
who escaped from hostile threats by taking to the sea for refuge. They grew in
power and conquered parts of Egypt. The Dutch indeed have lived aboard
houseboats and scows forever, but of course the idea of a bug-out boat is to
search for safety in a relatively remote area away from threats.
I guess
my qwest to develope a 'PROOF OF CONCEPT" is actually an attempt to collect
emperical data on as many aspects, attribures, variables, and impediments to
successful, and possibly prosperouse, long term survival in a "sailing
houseboat". My interest in answering these questions may, possibly, be unique to
me.
--- Inmailto:bolger%40yahoogroups.com,
<philbolger@...> wrote:
>out what âelseâ might be available. Whether for Doomsday Scenaria, or just offshore and inshore cruising, or just living-aboard without much long-distance ambitions â" whichever particular angle (and they shift...) â" youâd want a rugged shallow-draft type that can sit more or less upright on the more or less level mud/sand, or do the Atlantic. And of that âpersuasionâ weâve done a few of in both wood and steel construction. With more doable !
> Or you could talk to me to find
>And there is indeed no reason to give up on high degrees of sinking-resistance as long as the design bears this attribute in mind since earliest concept-stages.
>
>From: Scot McPherson
> Susanne Altenburger, PB&F
>
>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 2:41 PMmailto:bolger%40yahoogroups.com
> To:
> Cc:href="mailto:bolger%40yahoogroups.com">mailto:bolger%40yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboata boat to live aboard and long term liveabosrd cruise with. Which is what an Armageddon boat really is, you need one of the overly sturdy designs. Boats designed to be beached for servicing rather than relying on docking facilities, and can be serviced by carving lumber out of a tree with an adze, hatchets and hand powers saws. For that you might want to look at bhueler designs.
>
>
>
> My opinion and opinion only is if you are looking for
>be beached for hull repairs.
> They are heavy and slow, but designed to live through hurricanes, and
>Unsinkable ships by their very design trade offs are not suitable blue water vessels, at least not for long trips.
> They are not unsinkable though.
>MCSA
> Scot McPherson, PMP CISSP
> Old Lyme, CT20, 2013, at 12:35 PM, "Peter" <pvanderwaart@...> wrote:
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Aug
>sailing scow,
>
>
> > It is not so much to establish a PROOF of CONCEPT of the
> > but to prove that such a boat could be a permanentfamily shelter,
> > and can be moved to a new location under her ownpower if needed.
> > My vision was that in case of national emergency,or a disaster
> > of whatever origin, a family could be evacuated, andsafely and
> > comfortably sheltered, by grounding on a beach orsitting on the
> > mud, working the tides.sure what you think needs proving. People have lived on boats for centuries. Like this:
>
> I'm not
>href="http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4137/4899292823_1f2c4cbcef_z.jpg">http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4137/4899292823_1f2c4cbcef_z.jpg
>
>etc.
> Also barges in European canals, and numerous American cruisers,
>down-at-the-heels, used, fiberglass cruiser, possibly a center cockpit sloop built for the charter trades. After a hose down, and delousing the mattresses, you can move aboard and refurbish the engine and rig at your leisure.
> It would be much quicker and possibly cheaper to get a
>design, as you will find out if you try to make any facile changes. But it's not meant as a voyaging boat, and I doubt it's a good choice for out-running the apocalypse. PCB designed some other boats that would be better for that, but the requirements for going to see cause them to be more difficult to build.
> Don't get me wrong; I'm a big fan of #501. It's a remarkably clever
>
So for instance, tenders, he drew several very useful designs that thwart theft, row well, and can be built by anyone. These boats perform as well as any, but are easy and cheap to build. But he also drew a lot of designs for professional construction that were a lot more complex than his boxes.
I think the idea of a bug out boat is interesting, though there is a huge difference between a bag, and a slow moving dwelling, as far as post apocalyptic viability.
--- In bolger@yahoogroups.com, <bolger@yahoogroups.com> wrote:Thanks so much for the well-thought out and thorough comments on the #501...I must admit that my understanding of boating is very limited, and my enthusiasm is taking over in the vacuum of insufficient knowledge. I had read about Loose Moose sailing to the Med, and facing very rough weather, and handling herself commendably. I myself have sailed the Med, but it was aboard the USS Saratoga, an aircraft carrier, and I can attest the seas there can be quite rough.
I have indeed not expressed myself clearly as to my interest in building the FIRST #501. It is not so much to establish a PROOF of CONCEPT of the sailing scow, but to prove that such a boat could be a permanent family shelter, and can be moved to a new location under her own power if needed. My vision was that in case of national emergency, or a disaster of whatever origin, a family could be evacuated, and safely and comfortably sheltered, by grounding on a beach or sitting on the mud, working the tides.
Sailing would be done rarely, taking weather conditions into account when possible. Sailing would not be the main purpose of #501, but survival of the family within it would be. Also, please don't hurt yourselves laughing, but I was thinking that junk sails would be a better rig.
Someone suggested that my motive was to trick somebody into building it so I could sail it. Again, it is my fault for not explaining myself. I have never sailed in a sailboat in my life, and I may never do so, although they do rent sail boats on Lake Poway, not too far from my house. It is true that I do not have the money to finance any boat building project, since I am 65 years old, have a heart condition, I am raising two young grandsons, and living off of social security and a little income from electronic repairs and soldering.
So, why am I so interested in making #501 a survival "bug out boat"?
I don't know! But I think just the idea of describing and writing about creating such an option for those people who fear impending doom in their lifetimes has struck a chord in my sense of adventure.
Dave Seigler describes "having a front row seat for TEOTWAWKI", or something like that, as being at least in part his motivation for making Slacktide. I can see #501 lumbering up to and taking the beach or mud and sitting for as long as it takes. It may be that a violent devolving of our decaying society will not happen soon, but now that boys are allowed to use the girl's bathrooms and lockers in public schools here in California, at least for some of us it might be time to start making some plans.
As far as Mexico is concerned, I lived there for 5 years and worked in the exporting industry. My CONSUEGRO was a fisherman boat owner for years, and has contacts in the Ensenada maritime business, including a modern shipyard used to care for the large Tuna boats, and luxury yachts. I speak the lingo, and I know the devious ways of the local population.
If I were to help someone build a #501, in payment for my services I would just like to document the building of it and the sea trials, including how well she can ground herself, and serve as a stable home.
It may be that nobody will ever build it, and to me, that would just be a shame.
Thanks again for the great feedback. My apologies for not taking the effort to express my thoughts.
Darrell Turner
San Diego, CA--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "John Dalziel" <freshairfiend@...> wrote:
>
> Darrell, I suggest you drop this project, for the following reasons:
>
> 1: "PROOF OF CONCEPT"-- This concept has been proven for at least 150 years in the USA alone, and does not need further proof.
>
> 2: "AND be capable of sailing up and down the coast in a safe manner."-- It appears from context you are speaking of the North American West Coast. Have you looked at North Pacific pilot charts? Do so. You will immediately see that the trip north will routinely be hellish in a short, fat, scow-bodied schooner. This design is a horrible choice for that voyage- and was never intended for this sort of sailing. It's an East Coast sort of boat, best suited for bays, rivers, and the ICW.
>
> You want something with a comfortable motion and a weatherly rig (not a gaff schooner) if you are going to try that north-bound trip. Otherwise you are better off sailing to Hawaii, then north, using the current to boost you along- but #501 is not a particularly good boat for that either. Have a look at Phil's "Offshore Leeboarder" (BWAOM) for a slightly longer boat *much* better suited for either voyage. For that matter, Loose Moose 2 would also be better (and cheaper), if you insist on a scow. Others here may have better recommendations.
>
> 3: You need to take Phil's description of the design seriously. He was quite explicit about what it was intended for, the shortcomings of the initial design that should be corrected, and also, specifically, that it needs *very* protected bodies of water for anchoring, as the wide and long forwards projection of the bow bottom WILL pound furiously at anchor (I agree, from the authority of having lived on an AS29 for 12 years). Along the West Coast you simply do not have many of these small waters available between Bahia Tortuga and San Francisco Bay, and after that they are again sparse until you get to the Columbia River, and are not really plentiful until you are within the Strait of Juan de Fuca- and that's a loooong way from Mexico...
>
> 4: A dodgy-looking project management scheme that will probably scare away any knowledgeable customer, who must first trust you, then your ability to manage a project in which you have no personal investment, being done by builders with whom you have never worked, in a country where you don't live (and with a notoriously corrupt government and little legal recourse); builders for whom you only have recommendations from your father-in-law and who may or may not have any reason for loyalty TO your father-in-law (you don't know as he hasn't recommended them to you yet)- but who certainly have no loyalty to you personally, or your customer. This amount of trust is too much to ask from a prospective owner.
>
> So, to repeat- don't do this. Wrong reason, wrong boat, wrong building scheme.
>
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Darrell" <dario2rnr@> wrote:
> >
> > I would like to see the existence of a Bolger #501 to serve as "PROOF OF CONCEPT"....the concept is that I think this design has the capability of serving as a permanent home for a small family, AND be capable of sailing up and down the coast in a safe manner. I also think this design can find virtually unlimited resting places in shoal draft areas, explore almost anywhere, and avoid marina fees.
> > Also, for those who fear natural and man-made disasters, #501 would be an ideal bug-out boat.
> >
> > I don't need to own any percentage of the boat. However, I would need to have my expenses covered, if I were to arrange for it to be built in Baja Mexico. My son's Father in Law is a fisherman in Ensenada, Mexico. He knows everybody in the boating industry there, and he can recommend a local carpenter/shipwright/boat repairman etc to do the actual work. I would take the materials needed down to him.
> >
> > Dave Seigler made his Slacktide triloboat from low-cost materials, and I would suggest such an approach for #501 as well. The cost of manpower is very low in Mexico, and the shipwright with a couple of helpers would get the job done quickly.
> >
> > Of course, I would need to supervise closely to make sure every joint is epoxied/glued/filleted or whatever.
> >
> > This is very do-able, if there is the will. However, if I were to help someone make this a reality, I would need someone willing to allow the boat to serve as an experimental vessel, to demonstrate the feasibility of long-term living and the possibility of free or low cost docking/anchorage/grounding. And, of course, see trials in rough weather.
> >
> > If anyone is interested, we can get together and discuss it.
> >
> > Darrell Turner
> > San Diego, CA
>
the concept is well proven there.
mike
If anybody knows the Bolger designs it would be you, M'am. Thank you for illuminating the subject for me, and thanks to the others who have shown a genuine interest in considering the attributes of #501. When I was looking for Sailing Houseboat Scows I also came across Tillicum, a Garden design.http://triloboats.blogspot.com/2011/12/tale-of-two-scows.html
I bought the book that contains some drawings, and according to Garden, Tillicum "can go anywhere", but is better suited as a coastal cruiser. It draws 24" as opposed to #501's 18", and has a center board/keel. Any thoughts about this vessel's suitability for long term, secure, and comfortable family living? With the ability to change locations under it's own power? Another thing that to me is of highest importance is the that the sailing houseboat has enough room to make for quality living. That is what #501, and Tillicum, have to offer. And of course shoal draft.
Susanne, do you have a recommendation for a suitable "bug-out" boat?
I have seen images of generations of Chinese living aboard junks, and there is some historical data on "The Sea Peoples", different tribes who escaped from hostile threats by taking to the sea for refuge. They grew in power and conquered parts of Egypt. The Dutch indeed have lived aboard houseboats and scows forever, but of course the idea of a bug-out boat is to search for safety in a relatively remote area away from threats.
I guess my qwest to develope a 'PROOF OF CONCEPT" is actually an attempt to collect emperical data on as many aspects, attribures, variables, and impediments to successful, and possibly prosperouse, long term survival in a "sailing houseboat". My interest in answering these questions may, possibly, be unique to me.
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, <philbolger@...> wrote:
>
> Or you could talk to me to find out what âelseâ might be available. Whether for Doomsday Scenaria, or just offshore and inshore cruising, or just living-aboard without much long-distance ambitions â" whichever particular angle (and they shift...) â" youâd want a rugged shallow-draft type that can sit more or less upright on the more or less level mud/sand, or do the Atlantic. And of that âpersuasionâ weâve done a few of in both wood and steel construction. With more doable !
>
> And there is indeed no reason to give up on high degrees of sinking-resistance as long as the design bears this attribute in mind since earliest concept-stages.
>
> Susanne Altenburger, PB&F
>
> From: Scot McPherson
> Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 2:41 PM
> To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> Cc:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
>
>
>
> My opinion and opinion only is if you are looking for a boat to live aboard and long term liveabosrd cruise with. Which is what an Armageddon boat really is, you need one of the overly sturdy designs. Boats designed to be beached for servicing rather than relying on docking facilities, and can be serviced by carving lumber out of a tree with an adze, hatchets and hand powers saws. For that you might want to look at bhueler designs.
>
> They are heavy and slow, but designed to live through hurricanes, and be beached for hull repairs.
>
> They are not unsinkable though. Unsinkable ships by their very design trade offs are not suitable blue water vessels, at least not for long trips.
>
> Scot McPherson, PMP CISSP MCSA
> Old Lyme, CT
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Aug 20, 2013, at 12:35 PM, "Peter" <pvanderwaart@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> > It is not so much to establish a PROOF of CONCEPT of the sailing scow,
> > but to prove that such a boat could be a permanent family shelter,
> > and can be moved to a new location under her own power if needed.
> > My vision was that in case of national emergency, or a disaster
> > of whatever origin, a family could be evacuated, and safely and
> > comfortably sheltered, by grounding on a beach or sitting on the
> > mud, working the tides.
>
> I'm not sure what you think needs proving. People have lived on boats for centuries. Like this:
>
>http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4137/4899292823_1f2c4cbcef_z.jpg
>
> Also barges in European canals, and numerous American cruisers, etc.
>
> It would be much quicker and possibly cheaper to get a down-at-the-heels, used, fiberglass cruiser, possibly a center cockpit sloop built for the charter trades. After a hose down, and delousing the mattresses, you can move aboard and refurbish the engine and rig at your leisure.
>
> Don't get me wrong; I'm a big fan of #501. It's a remarkably clever design, as you will find out if you try to make any facile changes. But it's not meant as a voyaging boat, and I doubt it's a good choice for out-running the apocalypse. PCB designed some other boats that would be better for that, but the requirements for going to see cause them to be more difficult to build.
>
And there is indeed no reason to give up on high degrees of sinking-resistance as long as the design bears this attribute in mind since earliest concept-stages.
Susanne Altenburger, PB&F
Scot McPherson, PMP CISSP MCSA
> It is not so much to establish a PROOF of CONCEPT of the sailing scow,
> but to prove that such a boat could be a permanent family shelter,
> and can be moved to a new location under her own power if
needed.
> My vision was that in case of national emergency, or a
disaster
> of whatever origin, a family could be evacuated, and safely
and
> comfortably sheltered, by grounding on a beach or sitting on
the
> mud, working the tides.
I'm not sure what you think needs
proving. People have lived on boats for centuries. Like this:
http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4137/4899292823_1f2c4cbcef_z.jpg
Also
barges in European canals, and numerous American cruisers, etc.
It
would be much quicker and possibly cheaper to get a down-at-the-heels, used,
fiberglass cruiser, possibly a center cockpit sloop built for the charter
trades. After a hose down, and delousing the mattresses, you can move aboard
and refurbish the engine and rig at your leisure.
Don't get me wrong;
I'm a big fan of #501. It's a remarkably clever design, as you will find out
if you try to make any facile changes. But it's not meant as a voyaging boat,
and I doubt it's a good choice for out-running the apocalypse. PCB designed
some other boats that would be better for that, but the requirements for going
to see cause them to be more difficult to build.
Scot McPherson, PMP CISSP MCSA
On Aug 20, 2013, at 12:35 PM, "Peter" <pvanderwaart@...> wrote:
> It is not so much to establish a PROOF of CONCEPT of the sailing scow,
> but to prove that such a boat could be a permanent family shelter,
> and can be moved to a new location under her own power if needed.
> My vision was that in case of national emergency, or a disaster
> of whatever origin, a family could be evacuated, and safely and
> comfortably sheltered, by grounding on a beach or sitting on the
> mud, working the tides.
I'm not sure what you think needs proving. People have lived on boats for centuries. Like this:
http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4137/4899292823_1f2c4cbcef_z.jpg
Also barges in European canals, and numerous American cruisers, etc.
It would be much quicker and possibly cheaper to get a down-at-the-heels, used, fiberglass cruiser, possibly a center cockpit sloop built for the charter trades. After a hose down, and delousing the mattresses, you can move aboard and refurbish the engine and rig at your leisure.
Don't get me wrong; I'm a big fan of #501. It's a remarkably clever design, as you will find out if you try to make any facile changes. But it's not meant as a voyaging boat, and I doubt it's a good choice for out-running the apocalypse. PCB designed some other boats that would be better for that, but the requirements for going to see cause them to be more difficult to build.
> It is not so much to establish a PROOF of CONCEPT of the sailing scow,I'm not sure what you think needs proving. People have lived on boats for centuries. Like this:
> but to prove that such a boat could be a permanent family shelter,
> and can be moved to a new location under her own power if needed.
> My vision was that in case of national emergency, or a disaster
> of whatever origin, a family could be evacuated, and safely and
> comfortably sheltered, by grounding on a beach or sitting on the
> mud, working the tides.
http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4137/4899292823_1f2c4cbcef_z.jpg
Also barges in European canals, and numerous American cruisers, etc.
It would be much quicker and possibly cheaper to get a down-at-the-heels, used, fiberglass cruiser, possibly a center cockpit sloop built for the charter trades. After a hose down, and delousing the mattresses, you can move aboard and refurbish the engine and rig at your leisure.
Don't get me wrong; I'm a big fan of #501. It's a remarkably clever design, as you will find out if you try to make any facile changes. But it's not meant as a voyaging boat, and I doubt it's a good choice for out-running the apocalypse. PCB designed some other boats that would be better for that, but the requirements for going to see cause them to be more difficult to build.
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Chief Redelk <chiefredelk@...> wrote:
>
> Well.. I love my gal. I would not be single for anything BUT... Have
> you noticed. Men are the ones picking flowers. writing songs and
> poetry. Women are by nature more in love with their kids and grand
> kids.Men are mostly an after thought.... Many men tell me their wives
> ignore them way to often...My lady works out of town and phone's me
> less than half as much as I phone her. I feel that when I am out of
> sight I am out of her mind but she swears she loves me... I believe
> women are just that way by nature.... If you take a poll most men
> still rate marriage one point higher on the happy side than most
> women.
> With women being LESS happy in the marriage I suppose they are prone
> to be less demonstrative of their feelings..Most men are idiots when
> it comes to good women and abuse them as well. By ignoring women men
> are abusing them but have no idea...I feel that a lot of women are
> like they are because some man made her that way..not all but some...
> Men complain about wives so much it's became a joke among them.. Women
> may be unhappy but IF Daddy is making good money she is more apt to
> stay in a unhappy marriage. Men also think about the expense so they
> believe it's cheaper to keep her and the cycle of sadness
> continues.... One successful woman told me she left a good man not
> because he was not a good man but that she made more money and felt it
> was her taking care of HIM. She felt it should be the other way
> around.. I know one couple who both the wife and husband hold good
> jobs..The man has to pay for everything in the family because his wife
> said HER money is HER money because the man' s job it so support the
> family.. The problem as I see it is some women want it both ways. Many
> years ago when most women were not employed the man DID pay
> everything. BUT now that women work I believe BOTH should share the
> expenses..BUT maybe I am unfair.. In my mind what we get out of a
> relationship SHOULD provide for emotional need and IF a woman is
> taking care of my needs she is worth what it cost me to make her
> happy.... I have noticed that men seem to have a much greater
> emotional need greater than most women do..Women holding good jobs
> with few emotional needs can seem cold and uncaring to a man who
> simply loves to be in love and wishes she were more romantic... Good
> day, Chief.
>
> On 8/19/13, philbolger@... <philbolger@...> wrote:
> > ...point well take. Just could not help `tweak' you on that remark...
> > Susanne Altenburger, PB&F
> >
> > From: captainrocky@...
> > Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 2:30 PM
> > To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
> >
> >
> >
> > Sue, I am married 46 years, only one wife, but had many boats. I am much
> > more fickle with boats.
> > Rocky . PS I once has a charter boat service named Rocky Boats. Needless to
> > say ,not real successful.
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > From: philbolger@...
> > To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 12:24:34 PM
> > Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
> >
> >
> >
> > ....sounds like a `rocky' outlook on life, with likely a `rocky' life
> > between showing up for it and then leaving it...
> > You may be missing out on a lot of the good stuff !?
> >
> > Susanne Altenburger, PB&F
> >
> > From: captainrocky@...
> > Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 11:00 AM
> > To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
> >
> >
> >
> > Boats like wives make you happy two days. The day you get 'em and the day
> > you get rid of them.( or vice versa to be fair) ps--- please don't tell my
> > wife I wrote this!
> > pps -- sorry sue!
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > From: "Chris S. Crandall" <crandall@...>
> > To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 10:06:49 AM
> > Subject: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
> >
> >
> >> I wouldn't advise that. Joint ownership of a boat works about as well as
> >> sharing a wife.
> >
> > Which is to say it works for some, but not others. YMMV.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
I have indeed not expressed myself clearly as to my interest in building the FIRST #501. It is not so much to establish a PROOF of CONCEPT of the sailing scow, but to prove that such a boat could be a permanent family shelter, and can be moved to a new location under her own power if needed. My vision was that in case of national emergency, or a disaster of whatever origin, a family could be evacuated, and safely and comfortably sheltered, by grounding on a beach or sitting on the mud, working the tides.
Sailing would be done rarely, taking weather conditions into account when possible. Sailing would not be the main purpose of #501, but survival of the family within it would be. Also, please don't hurt yourselves laughing, but I was thinking that junk sails would be a better rig.
Someone suggested that my motive was to trick somebody into building it so I could sail it. Again, it is my fault for not explaining myself. I have never sailed in a sailboat in my life, and I may never do so, although they do rent sail boats on Lake Poway, not too far from my house. It is true that I do not have the money to finance any boat building project, since I am 65 years old, have a heart condition, I am raising two young grandsons, and living off of social security and a little income from electronic repairs and soldering.
So, why am I so interested in making #501 a survival "bug out boat"?
I don't know! But I think just the idea of describing and writing about creating such an option for those people who fear impending doom in their lifetimes has struck a chord in my sense of adventure.
Dave Seigler describes "having a front row seat for TEOTWAWKI", or something like that, as being at least in part his motivation for making Slacktide. I can see #501 lumbering up to and taking the beach or mud and sitting for as long as it takes. It may be that a violent devolving of our decaying society will not happen soon, but now that boys are allowed to use the girl's bathrooms and lockers in public schools here in California, at least for some of us it might be time to start making some plans.
As far as Mexico is concerned, I lived there for 5 years and worked in the exporting industry. My CONSUEGRO was a fisherman boat owner for years, and has contacts in the Ensenada maritime business, including a modern shipyard used to care for the large Tuna boats, and luxury yachts. I speak the lingo, and I know the devious ways of the local population.
If I were to help someone build a #501, in payment for my services I would just like to document the building of it and the sea trials, including how well she can ground herself, and serve as a stable home.
It may be that nobody will ever build it, and to me, that would just be a shame.
Thanks again for the great feedback. My apologies for not taking the effort to express my thoughts.
Darrell Turner
San Diego, CA
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "John Dalziel" <freshairfiend@...> wrote:
>
> Darrell, I suggest you drop this project, for the following reasons:
>
> 1: "PROOF OF CONCEPT"-- This concept has been proven for at least 150 years in the USA alone, and does not need further proof.
>
> 2: "AND be capable of sailing up and down the coast in a safe manner."-- It appears from context you are speaking of the North American West Coast. Have you looked at North Pacific pilot charts? Do so. You will immediately see that the trip north will routinely be hellish in a short, fat, scow-bodied schooner. This design is a horrible choice for that voyage- and was never intended for this sort of sailing. It's an East Coast sort of boat, best suited for bays, rivers, and the ICW.
>
> You want something with a comfortable motion and a weatherly rig (not a gaff schooner) if you are going to try that north-bound trip. Otherwise you are better off sailing to Hawaii, then north, using the current to boost you along- but #501 is not a particularly good boat for that either. Have a look at Phil's "Offshore Leeboarder" (BWAOM) for a slightly longer boat *much* better suited for either voyage. For that matter, Loose Moose 2 would also be better (and cheaper), if you insist on a scow. Others here may have better recommendations.
>
> 3: You need to take Phil's description of the design seriously. He was quite explicit about what it was intended for, the shortcomings of the initial design that should be corrected, and also, specifically, that it needs *very* protected bodies of water for anchoring, as the wide and long forwards projection of the bow bottom WILL pound furiously at anchor (I agree, from the authority of having lived on an AS29 for 12 years). Along the West Coast you simply do not have many of these small waters available between Bahia Tortuga and San Francisco Bay, and after that they are again sparse until you get to the Columbia River, and are not really plentiful until you are within the Strait of Juan de Fuca- and that's a loooong way from Mexico...
>
> 4: A dodgy-looking project management scheme that will probably scare away any knowledgeable customer, who must first trust you, then your ability to manage a project in which you have no personal investment, being done by builders with whom you have never worked, in a country where you don't live (and with a notoriously corrupt government and little legal recourse); builders for whom you only have recommendations from your father-in-law and who may or may not have any reason for loyalty TO your father-in-law (you don't know as he hasn't recommended them to you yet)- but who certainly have no loyalty to you personally, or your customer. This amount of trust is too much to ask from a prospective owner.
>
> So, to repeat- don't do this. Wrong reason, wrong boat, wrong building scheme.
>
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Darrell" <dario2rnr@> wrote:
> >
> > I would like to see the existence of a Bolger #501 to serve as "PROOF OF CONCEPT"....the concept is that I think this design has the capability of serving as a permanent home for a small family, AND be capable of sailing up and down the coast in a safe manner. I also think this design can find virtually unlimited resting places in shoal draft areas, explore almost anywhere, and avoid marina fees.
> > Also, for those who fear natural and man-made disasters, #501 would be an ideal bug-out boat.
> >
> > I don't need to own any percentage of the boat. However, I would need to have my expenses covered, if I were to arrange for it to be built in Baja Mexico. My son's Father in Law is a fisherman in Ensenada, Mexico. He knows everybody in the boating industry there, and he can recommend a local carpenter/shipwright/boat repairman etc to do the actual work. I would take the materials needed down to him.
> >
> > Dave Seigler made his Slacktide triloboat from low-cost materials, and I would suggest such an approach for #501 as well. The cost of manpower is very low in Mexico, and the shipwright with a couple of helpers would get the job done quickly.
> >
> > Of course, I would need to supervise closely to make sure every joint is epoxied/glued/filleted or whatever.
> >
> > This is very do-able, if there is the will. However, if I were to help someone make this a reality, I would need someone willing to allow the boat to serve as an experimental vessel, to demonstrate the feasibility of long-term living and the possibility of free or low cost docking/anchorage/grounding. And, of course, see trials in rough weather.
> >
> > If anyone is interested, we can get together and discuss it.
> >
> > Darrell Turner
> > San Diego, CA
>
Hey Chief. Very insightful.Women'sLib changed a whole lot of things in the 60's. I am all in favor of the Lib. All girls should get a job and burn their bras.
Conversely all men are pigs. It is amazing that anybody stays together for more years than it takes to raise kids. My two daughters are bothdivorcedand remarried. My advice to them as young married was if you ain't happy get out. They did.
I worked with a man that was married for 51 years and had not talked to his wife for 40 of them. They still lived together. He would come to work 2 hours early and stay 2 hours late. They finally retired him at age 75 and he sued them for age discrimination. He really didn't want to stay home.
My wife was and still is my best friend. A good marriage is the best and a bad marriage is Hell. (for both parties). Rocky
From:"ChiefRedelk" <chiefredelk@gmail.com>
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Sent:Monday, August 19, 2013 6:55:19 PM
Subject:Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
Well.. I love my gal. I would not be single for anything BUT... Have
you noticed. Men are the ones picking flowers. writing songs and
poetry. Women are by nature more in love with their kids and grand
kids.Men are mostly an after thought.... Many men tell me their wives
ignore them way to often...My lady works out of town and phone's me
less than half as much as I phone her. I feel that when I am out of
sight I am out of her mind but she swears she loves me... I believe
women are just that way by nature.... If you take a poll most men
still rate marriage one point higher on the happy side than most
women.
With women being LESS happy in the marriage I suppose they are prone
to be less demonstrative of their feelings..Most men are idiots when
it comes to good women and abuse them as well. By ignoring women men
are abusing them but have no idea...I feel that a lot of women are
like they are because some man made her that way..not all but some...
Men complain about wives so much it's became a joke among them.. Women
may be unhappy but IF Daddy is making good money she is more apt to
stay in a unhappy marriage. Men also think about the expense so they
believe it's cheaper to keep her and the cycle of sadness
continues.... One successful woman told me she left a good man not
because he was not a good man but that she made more money and felt it
was her taking care of HIM. She felt it should be the other way
around.. I know one couple who both the wife and husband hold good
jobs..The man has to pay for everything in the family because his wife
said HER money is HER money because theman's job it so support the
family.. The problem as I see it is some women want it both ways. Many
years ago when most women were not employed the man DID pay
everything. BUT now that women work I believe BOTH should share the
expenses..BUT maybe I am unfair.. In my mind what we get out of a
relationship SHOULD provide for emotional need and IF a woman is
taking care of my needs she is worth what it cost me to make her
happy.... I have noticed that men seem to have a much greater
emotional need greater than most women do..Women holding good jobs
with few emotional needs can seem cold and uncaring to a man who
simply loves to be in love and wishes she were more romantic... Good
day, Chief.
On 8/19/13,philbolger@... <philbolger@...> wrote:
> ...point well take. Just could not help ‘tweak’ you on that remark...
> SusanneAltenburger, PB&F
>
> From:captainrocky@...
> Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 2:30 PM
> To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
>
>
>
> Sue, I am married 46 years, only one wife, but had many boats. I am much
> more fickle with boats.
> Rocky . PS I once has a charter boat service named Rocky Boats. Needless to
> say ,not real successful.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From:philbolger@...
> To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 12:24:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
>
>
>
> ....sounds like a ‘rocky’ outlook on life, with likely a ‘rocky’ life
> between showing up for it and then leaving it...
> You may be missing out on a lot of the good stuff !?
>
> SusanneAltenburger, PB&F
>
> From:captainrocky@...
> Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 11:00 AM
> To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
>
>
>
> Boats like wives make you happy two days. The day you get'emand the day
> you get rid of them.( or viceversato be fair)ps--- please don't tell my
> wife I wrote this!
>pps-- sorry sue!
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From: "Chris S.Crandall" <crandall@ku.edu>
> To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 10:06:49 AM
> Subject: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
>
>
>> I wouldn't advise that. Joint ownership of a boat works about as well as
>> sharing a wife.
>
> Which is to say it works for some, but not others. YMMV.
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------
Bolgerrules!!!
- NO "GO AWAYSPAMMER!" 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.com Yahoo! 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 settingsonlinego to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bolger/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
bolger-digest@yahoogroups.com
bolger-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> Tounsubscribefrom this group, send an email to:
bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
On Aug 19, 2013, at 21:53, "John Dalziel" <freshairfiend@...> wrote:
Darrell, I suggest you drop this project, for the following reasons:
1: "PROOF OF CONCEPT"-- This concept has been proven for at least 150 years in the USA alone, and does not need further proof.
2: "AND be capable of sailing up and down the coast in a safe manner."-- It appears from context you are speaking of the North American West Coast. Have you looked at North Pacific pilot charts? Do so. You will immediately see that the trip north will routinely be hellish in a short, fat, scow-bodied schooner. This design is a horrible choice for that voyage- and was never intended for this sort of sailing. It's an East Coast sort of boat, best suited for bays, rivers, and the ICW.
You want something with a comfortable motion and a weatherly rig (not a gaff schooner) if you are going to try that north-bound trip. Otherwise you are better off sailing to Hawaii, then north, using the current to boost you along- but #501 is not a particularly good boat for that either. Have a look at Phil's "Offshore Leeboarder" (BWAOM) for a slightly longer boat *much* better suited for either voyage. For that matter, Loose Moose 2 would also be better (and cheaper), if you insist on a scow. Others here may have better recommendations.
3: You need to take Phil's description of the design seriously. He was quite explicit about what it was intended for, the shortcomings of the initial design that should be corrected, and also, specifically, that it needs *very* protected bodies of water for anchoring, as the wide and long forwards projection of the bow bottom WILL pound furiously at anchor (I agree, from the authority of having lived on an AS29 for 12 years). Along the West Coast you simply do not have many of these small waters available between Bahia Tortuga and San Francisco Bay, and after that they are again sparse until you get to the Columbia River, and are not really plentiful until you are within the Strait of Juan de Fuca- and that's a loooong way from Mexico...
4: A dodgy-looking project management scheme that will probably scare away any knowledgeable customer, who must first trust you, then your ability to manage a project in which you have no personal investment, being done by builders with whom you have never worked, in a country where you don't live (and with a notoriously corrupt government and little legal recourse); builders for whom you only have recommendations from your father-in-law and who may or may not have any reason for loyalty TO your father-in-law (you don't know as he hasn't recommended them to you yet)- but who certainly have no loyalty to you personally, or your customer. This amount of trust is too much to ask from a prospective owner.
So, to repeat- don't do this. Wrong reason, wrong boat, wrong building scheme.
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Darrell" <dario2rnr@...> wrote:
>
> I would like to see the existence of a Bolger #501 to serve as "PROOF OF CONCEPT"....the concept is that I think this design has the capability of serving as a permanent home for a small family, AND be capable of sailing up and down the coast in a safe manner. I also think this design can find virtually unlimited resting places in shoal draft areas, explore almost anywhere, and avoid marina fees.
> Also, for those who fear natural and man-made disasters, #501 would be an ideal bug-out boat.
>
> I don't need to own any percentage of the boat. However, I would need to have my expenses covered, if I were to arrange for it to be built in Baja Mexico. My son's Father in Law is a fisherman in Ensenada, Mexico. He knows everybody in the boating industry there, and he can recommend a local carpenter/shipwright/boat repairman etc to do the actual work. I would take the materials needed down to him.
>
> Dave Seigler made his Slacktide triloboat from low-cost materials, and I would suggest such an approach for #501 as well. The cost of manpower is very low in Mexico, and the shipwright with a couple of helpers would get the job done quickly.
>
> Of course, I would need to supervise closely to make sure every joint is epoxied/glued/filleted or whatever.
>
> This is very do-able, if there is the will. However, if I were to help someone make this a reality, I would need someone willing to allow the boat to serve as an experimental vessel, to demonstrate the feasibility of long-term living and the possibility of free or low cost docking/anchorage/grounding. And, of course, see trials in rough weather.
>
> If anyone is interested, we can get together and discuss it.
>
> Darrell Turner
> San Diego, CA
dead. He was also good on boats. ---Mason
-----Original Message-----
From:bolger@yahoogroups.com[mailto:bolger@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Chief Redelk
Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 6:55 PM
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
Well.. I love my gal. I would not be single for anything BUT... Have you
noticed. Men are the ones picking flowers. writing songs and poetry. Women
are by nature more in love with their kids and grand kids.Men are mostly an
after thought.... Many men tell me their wives ignore them way to often...My
lady works out of town and phone's me less than half as much as I phone her.
I feel that when I am out of sight I am out of her mind but she swears she
loves me... I believe women are just that way by nature.... If you take a
poll most men still rate marriage one point higher on the happy side than
most women.
With women being LESS happy in the marriage I suppose they are prone to be
less demonstrative of their feelings..Most men are idiots when it comes to
good women and abuse them as well. By ignoring women men are abusing them
but have no idea...I feel that a lot of women are like they are because some
man made her that way..not all but some...
Men complain about wives so much it's became a joke among them.. Women may
be unhappy but IF Daddy is making good money she is more apt to stay in a
unhappy marriage. Men also think about the expense so they believe it's
cheaper to keep her and the cycle of sadness continues.... One successful
woman told me she left a good man not because he was not a good man but that
she made more money and felt it was her taking care of HIM. She felt it
should be the other way around.. I know one couple who both the wife and
husband hold good jobs..The man has to pay for everything in the family
because his wife said HER money is HER money because the man' s job it so
support the family.. The problem as I see it is some women want it both
ways. Many years ago when most women were not employed the man DID pay
everything. BUT now that women work I believe BOTH should share the
expenses..BUT maybe I am unfair.. In my mind what we get out of a
relationship SHOULD provide for emotional need and IF a woman is taking care
of my needs she is worth what it cost me to make her happy.... I have
noticed that men seem to have a much greater emotional need greater than
most women do..Women holding good jobs with few emotional needs can seem
cold and uncaring to a man who simply loves to be in love and wishes she
were more romantic... Good day, Chief.
On 8/19/13,philbolger@...<philbolger@...> wrote:
> ...point well take. Just could not help 'tweak' you on that remark...
> Susanne Altenburger, PB&F
>
> From:captainrocky@...
> Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 2:30 PM
> To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
>
>
>
> Sue, I am married 46 years, only one wife, but had many boats. I am
> much more fickle with boats.
> Rocky . PS I once has a charter boat service named Rocky Boats.
> Needless to say ,not real successful.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> From:philbolger@...
> To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 12:24:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
>
>
>
> ....sounds like a 'rocky' outlook on life, with likely a 'rocky' life
> between showing up for it and then leaving it...
> You may be missing out on a lot of the good stuff !?
>
> Susanne Altenburger, PB&F
>
> From:captainrocky@...
> Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 11:00 AM
> To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
>
>
>
> Boats like wives make you happy two days. The day you get 'em and the
> day you get rid of them.( or vice versa to be fair) ps--- please don't
> tell my wife I wrote this!
> pps -- sorry sue!
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> From: "Chris S. Crandall" <crandall@...>
> To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 10:06:49 AM
> Subject: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
>
>
>> I wouldn't advise that. Joint ownership of a boat works about as well
>> as sharing a wife.
>
> Which is to say it works for some, but not others. YMMV.
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------
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
you noticed. Men are the ones picking flowers. writing songs and
poetry. Women are by nature more in love with their kids and grand
kids.Men are mostly an after thought.... Many men tell me their wives
ignore them way to often...My lady works out of town and phone's me
less than half as much as I phone her. I feel that when I am out of
sight I am out of her mind but she swears she loves me... I believe
women are just that way by nature.... If you take a poll most men
still rate marriage one point higher on the happy side than most
women.
With women being LESS happy in the marriage I suppose they are prone
to be less demonstrative of their feelings..Most men are idiots when
it comes to good women and abuse them as well. By ignoring women men
are abusing them but have no idea...I feel that a lot of women are
like they are because some man made her that way..not all but some...
Men complain about wives so much it's became a joke among them.. Women
may be unhappy but IF Daddy is making good money she is more apt to
stay in a unhappy marriage. Men also think about the expense so they
believe it's cheaper to keep her and the cycle of sadness
continues.... One successful woman told me she left a good man not
because he was not a good man but that she made more money and felt it
was her taking care of HIM. She felt it should be the other way
around.. I know one couple who both the wife and husband hold good
jobs..The man has to pay for everything in the family because his wife
said HER money is HER money because the man' s job it so support the
family.. The problem as I see it is some women want it both ways. Many
years ago when most women were not employed the man DID pay
everything. BUT now that women work I believe BOTH should share the
expenses..BUT maybe I am unfair.. In my mind what we get out of a
relationship SHOULD provide for emotional need and IF a woman is
taking care of my needs she is worth what it cost me to make her
happy.... I have noticed that men seem to have a much greater
emotional need greater than most women do..Women holding good jobs
with few emotional needs can seem cold and uncaring to a man who
simply loves to be in love and wishes she were more romantic... Good
day, Chief.
On 8/19/13,philbolger@...<philbolger@...> wrote:
> ...point well take. Just could not help ‘tweak’ you on that remark...
> Susanne Altenburger, PB&F
>
> From:captainrocky@...
> Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 2:30 PM
> To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
>
>
>
> Sue, I am married 46 years, only one wife, but had many boats. I am much
> more fickle with boats.
> Rocky . PS I once has a charter boat service named Rocky Boats. Needless to
> say ,not real successful.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From:philbolger@...
> To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 12:24:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
>
>
>
> ....sounds like a ‘rocky’ outlook on life, with likely a ‘rocky’ life
> between showing up for it and then leaving it...
> You may be missing out on a lot of the good stuff !?
>
> Susanne Altenburger, PB&F
>
> From:captainrocky@...
> Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 11:00 AM
> To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
>
>
>
> Boats like wives make you happy two days. The day you get 'em and the day
> you get rid of them.( or vice versa to be fair) ps--- please don't tell my
> wife I wrote this!
> pps -- sorry sue!
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From: "Chris S. Crandall" <crandall@...>
> To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 10:06:49 AM
> Subject: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
>
>
>> I wouldn't advise that. Joint ownership of a boat works about as well as
>> sharing a wife.
>
> Which is to say it works for some, but not others. YMMV.
>
>
>
>
>
On Aug 19, 2013, at 4:53 PM, John Dalziel <freshairfiend@...> wrote:Darrell, I suggest you drop this project, for the following reasons:
1: "PROOF OF CONCEPT"-- This concept has been proven for at least 150 years in the USA alone, and does not need further proof.
2: "AND be capable of sailing up and down the coast in a safe manner."-- It appears from context you are speaking of the North American West Coast. Have you looked at North Pacific pilot charts? Do so. You will immediately see that the trip north will routinely be hellish in a short, fat, scow-bodied schooner. This design is a horrible choice for that voyage- and was never intended for this sort of sailing. It's an East Coast sort of boat, best suited for bays, rivers, and the ICW.
You want something with a comfortable motion and a weatherly rig (not a gaff schooner) if you are going to try that north-bound trip. Otherwise you are better off sailing to Hawaii, then north, using the current to boost you along- but #501 is not a particularly good boat for that either. Have a look at Phil's "Offshore Leeboarder" (BWAOM) for a slightly longer boat *much* better suited for either voyage. For that matter, Loose Moose 2 would also be better (and cheaper), if you insist on a scow. Others here may have better recommendations.
3: You need to take Phil's description of the design seriously. He was quite explicit about what it was intended for, the shortcomings of the initial design that should be corrected, and also, specifically, that it needs *very* protected bodies of water for anchoring, as the wide and long forwards projection of the bow bottom WILL pound furiously at anchor (I agree, from the authority of having lived on an AS29 for 12 years). Along the West Coast you simply do not have many of these small waters available between Bahia Tortuga and San Francisco Bay, and after that they are again sparse until you get to the Columbia River, and are not really plentiful until you are within the Strait of Juan de Fuca- and that's a loooong way from Mexico...
4: A dodgy-looking project management scheme that will probably scare away any knowledgeable customer, who must first trust you, then your ability to manage a project in which you have no personal investment, being done by builders with whom you have never worked, in a country where you don't live (and with a notoriously corrupt government and little legal recourse); builders for whom you only have recommendations from your father-in-law and who may or may not have any reason for loyalty TO your father-in-law (you don't know as he hasn't recommended them to you yet)- but who certainly have no loyalty to you personally, or your customer. This amount of trust is too much to ask from a prospective owner.
So, to repeat- don't do this. Wrong reason, wrong boat, wrong building scheme.
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Darrell" <dario2rnr@...> wrote:
>
> I would like to see the existence of a Bolger #501 to serve as "PROOF OF CONCEPT"....the concept is that I think this design has the capability of serving as a permanent home for a small family, AND be capable of sailing up and down the coast in a safe manner. I also think this design can find virtually unlimited resting places in shoal draft areas, explore almost anywhere, and avoid marina fees.
> Also, for those who fear natural and man-made disasters, #501 would be an ideal bug-out boat.
>
> I don't need to own any percentage of the boat. However, I would need to have my expenses covered, if I were to arrange for it to be built in Baja Mexico. My son's Father in Law is a fisherman in Ensenada, Mexico. He knows everybody in the boating industry there, and he can recommend a local carpenter/shipwright/boat repairman etc to do the actual work. I would take the materials needed down to him.
>
> Dave Seigler made his Slacktide triloboat from low-cost materials, and I would suggest such an approach for #501 as well. The cost of manpower is very low in Mexico, and the shipwright with a couple of helpers would get the job done quickly.
>
> Of course, I would need to supervise closely to make sure every joint is epoxied/glued/filleted or whatever.
>
> This is very do-able, if there is the will. However, if I were to help someone make this a reality, I would need someone willing to allow the boat to serve as an experimental vessel, to demonstrate the feasibility of long-term living and the possibility of free or low cost docking/anchorage/grounding. And, of course, see trials in rough weather.
>
> If anyone is interested, we can get together and discuss it.
>
> Darrell Turner
> San Diego, CA
1: "PROOF OF CONCEPT"-- This concept has been proven for at least 150 years in the USA alone, and does not need further proof.
2: "AND be capable of sailing up and down the coast in a safe manner."-- It appears from context you are speaking of the North American West Coast. Have you looked at North Pacific pilot charts? Do so. You will immediately see that the trip north will routinely be hellish in a short, fat, scow-bodied schooner. This design is a horrible choice for that voyage- and was never intended for this sort of sailing. It's an East Coast sort of boat, best suited for bays, rivers, and the ICW.
You want something with a comfortable motion and a weatherly rig (not a gaff schooner) if you are going to try that north-bound trip. Otherwise you are better off sailing to Hawaii, then north, using the current to boost you along- but #501 is not a particularly good boat for that either. Have a look at Phil's "Offshore Leeboarder" (BWAOM) for a slightly longer boat *much* better suited for either voyage. For that matter, Loose Moose 2 would also be better (and cheaper), if you insist on a scow. Others here may have better recommendations.
3: You need to take Phil's description of the design seriously. He was quite explicit about what it was intended for, the shortcomings of the initial design that should be corrected, and also, specifically, that it needs *very* protected bodies of water for anchoring, as the wide and long forwards projection of the bow bottom WILL pound furiously at anchor (I agree, from the authority of having lived on an AS29 for 12 years). Along the West Coast you simply do not have many of these small waters available between Bahia Tortuga and San Francisco Bay, and after that they are again sparse until you get to the Columbia River, and are not really plentiful until you are within the Strait of Juan de Fuca- and that's a loooong way from Mexico...
4: A dodgy-looking project management scheme that will probably scare away any knowledgeable customer, who must first trust you, then your ability to manage a project in which you have no personal investment, being done by builders with whom you have never worked, in a country where you don't live (and with a notoriously corrupt government and little legal recourse); builders for whom you only have recommendations from your father-in-law and who may or may not have any reason for loyalty TO your father-in-law (you don't know as he hasn't recommended them to you yet)- but who certainly have no loyalty to you personally, or your customer. This amount of trust is too much to ask from a prospective owner.
So, to repeat- don't do this. Wrong reason, wrong boat, wrong building scheme.
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Darrell" <dario2rnr@...> wrote:
>
> I would like to see the existence of a Bolger #501 to serve as "PROOF OF CONCEPT"....the concept is that I think this design has the capability of serving as a permanent home for a small family, AND be capable of sailing up and down the coast in a safe manner. I also think this design can find virtually unlimited resting places in shoal draft areas, explore almost anywhere, and avoid marina fees.
> Also, for those who fear natural and man-made disasters, #501 would be an ideal bug-out boat.
>
> I don't need to own any percentage of the boat. However, I would need to have my expenses covered, if I were to arrange for it to be built in Baja Mexico. My son's Father in Law is a fisherman in Ensenada, Mexico. He knows everybody in the boating industry there, and he can recommend a local carpenter/shipwright/boat repairman etc to do the actual work. I would take the materials needed down to him.
>
> Dave Seigler made his Slacktide triloboat from low-cost materials, and I would suggest such an approach for #501 as well. The cost of manpower is very low in Mexico, and the shipwright with a couple of helpers would get the job done quickly.
>
> Of course, I would need to supervise closely to make sure every joint is epoxied/glued/filleted or whatever.
>
> This is very do-able, if there is the will. However, if I were to help someone make this a reality, I would need someone willing to allow the boat to serve as an experimental vessel, to demonstrate the feasibility of long-term living and the possibility of free or low cost docking/anchorage/grounding. And, of course, see trials in rough weather.
>
> If anyone is interested, we can get together and discuss it.
>
> Darrell Turner
> San Diego, CA
Susanne Altenburger, PB&F
Rocky . PS I once has a charter boat service named Rocky Boats. Needless to say ,not real successful.
From:philbolger@...
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Sent:Monday, August 19, 2013 12:24:34 PM
Subject:Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
You may be missing out on a lot of the good stuff !?
Susanne Altenburger, PB&F
pps -- sorry sue!
From:"Chris S. Crandall" <crandall@...>
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Sent:Monday, August 19, 2013 10:06:49 AM
Subject:[bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
> I wouldn't advise that. Joint ownership of a boat works about as well as
sharing a wife.Which is to say it works for some, but not others. YMMV.
Rocky . PS I once has a charter boat service named Rocky Boats. Needless to say ,not real successful.
From:philbolger@...
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Sent:Monday, August 19, 2013 12:24:34 PM
Subject:Re: [bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
You may be missing out on a lot of the good stuff !?
Susanne Altenburger, PB&F
pps -- sorry sue!
From:"Chris S. Crandall" <crandall@...>
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Sent:Monday, August 19, 2013 10:06:49 AM
Subject:[bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
> I wouldn't advise that. Joint ownership of a boat works about as well as sharing a wife.
You may be missing out on a lot of the good stuff !?
Susanne Altenburger, PB&F
pps -- sorry sue!
From:"Chris S. Crandall" <crandall@...>
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Sent:Monday, August 19, 2013 10:06:49 AM
Subject:[bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
> I wouldn't advise that. Joint ownership of a boat works about as well as
sharing a wife.Which is to say it works for some, but not others. YMMV.
pps -- sorry sue!
From:"Chris S. Crandall" <crandall@...>
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Sent:Monday, August 19, 2013 10:06:49 AM
Subject:[bolger] Re: #501 35' sailing scow houseboat
Which is to say it works for some, but not others. YMMV.> I wouldn't advise that. Joint ownership of a boat works about as well as sharing a wife.
> I wouldn't advise that. Joint ownership of a boat works about as well as sharing a wife.Which is to say it works for some, but not others. YMMV.
Also, for those who fear natural and man-made disasters, #501 would be an ideal bug-out boat.
I don't need to own any percentage of the boat. However, I would need to have my expenses covered, if I were to arrange for it to be built in Baja Mexico. My son's Father in Law is a fisherman in Ensenada, Mexico. He knows everybody in the boating industry there, and he can recommend a local carpenter/shipwright/boat repairman etc to do the actual work. I would take the materials needed down to him.
Dave Seigler made his Slacktide triloboat from low-cost materials, and I would suggest such an approach for #501 as well. The cost of manpower is very low in Mexico, and the shipwright with a couple of helpers would get the job done quickly.
Of course, I would need to supervise closely to make sure every joint is epoxied/glued/filleted or whatever.
This is very do-able, if there is the will. However, if I were to help someone make this a reality, I would need someone willing to allow the boat to serve as an experimental vessel, to demonstrate the feasibility of long-term living and the possibility of free or low cost docking/anchorage/grounding. And, of course, see trials in rough weather.
If anyone is interested, we can get together and discuss it.
Darrell Turner
San Diego, CA
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Leigh <Leighpilot@...> wrote:
>
> I wouldn't advise that. Joint ownership of a boat works about as well as sharing a wife.
>
> Leigh Ross
>
> 484-464-1575 (C)
> www.unicornkayaks.com
>
>
>
> On Aug 17, 2013, at 11:20, "Darrell" <dario2rnr@...> wrote:
>
> > Is there anybody in Southern California interested in joining forces to build this boat?
> > I live in San Diego, and I can get this boat built in Tijuana or Ensenada Mexico.
> >
> >
>
Leigh Ross
On Aug 17, 2013, at 11:20, "Darrell" <dario2rnr@...> wrote:
Is there anybody in Southern California interested in joining forces to build this boat?
I live in San Diego, and I can get this boat built in Tijuana or Ensenada Mexico.
I live in San Diego, and I can get this boat built in Tijuana or Ensenada Mexico.