Re: Micro Question, bow openings
That's almost the story of my life. I get the concept right, the
particulars wrong!
John O'Neill
particulars wrong!
John O'Neill
--- In bolger@y..., Chris Crandall <crandall@u...> wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Feb 2001 jboatguy@c... wrote:
> > (this is actually literally what he had in mind. Surf, I think, a
> > little 15 footer, was developed from just that thinking--he
describes
> > her genisis as putting a bit of fairing ahead and astern of this
> > smaller, square, very practical and able dinghy (name?) that he'd
> > already designed, keep the same rig, and get a much faster, more
> > stable boat, with the same sprawing space and maybe more, for
hardly
> > any extra cost.
>
> "It was Teal," he said in pedant mode. It was derived from Elegant
Punt.
> "Why didn't you get it right the first time?"
On Sat, 10 Feb 2001jboatguy@...wrote:
"Why didn't you get it right the first time?"
> (this is actually literally what he had in mind. Surf, I think, a"It was Teal," he said in pedant mode. It was derived from Elegant Punt.
> little 15 footer, was developed from just that thinking--he describes
> her genisis as putting a bit of fairing ahead and astern of this
> smaller, square, very practical and able dinghy (name?) that he'd
> already designed, keep the same rig, and get a much faster, more
> stable boat, with the same sprawing space and maybe more, for hardly
> any extra cost.
"Why didn't you get it right the first time?"
In a message dated 02/10/2001 4:<BR14:<BR36 AM
Eastern Standard ,jboatguy@...writes:> To restate that in layman's
terms! (no offense Carron),
Offense??? That screed I gave was a late night tongue-in-cheek thing just for
fun. I hope no one took it seriously :-)
Cheers/Carron
Eastern Standard ,jboatguy@...writes:> To restate that in layman's
terms! (no offense Carron),
Offense??? That screed I gave was a late night tongue-in-cheek thing just for
fun. I hope no one took it seriously :-)
Cheers/Carron
To restate that in layman's terms! (no offense Carron), Boger's open
bow and sterm compartments aren't part of the actual 'hull'. They're
fairings extending from the squarish, dry, people compartment to more
effeciently push water out of the way ahead, and let it flow back
into place behind, in the process granting the boat a longer
waterline, most stability, and still yet faster progress, all else
being equal. And as long as they're there, the space between the
fairings serves as stowage for things that don't mind getting wet.
You woudln't be able to use them even if they were part of the hull
proper, cause you can't fit, so why bother trying to make them dry in
the first place?
(this is actually literally what he had in mind. Surf, I think, a
little 15 footer, was developed from just that thinking--he describes
her genisis as putting a bit of fairing ahead and astern of this
smaller, square, very practical and able dinghy (name?) that he'd
already designed, keep the same rig, and get a much faster, more
stable boat, with the same sprawing space and maybe more, for hardly
any extra cost.
Some people call him a genius. I just think he has yet to meet an
assumption he could stand not to question. (Maybe that is genius...)
John O'Neill
bow and sterm compartments aren't part of the actual 'hull'. They're
fairings extending from the squarish, dry, people compartment to more
effeciently push water out of the way ahead, and let it flow back
into place behind, in the process granting the boat a longer
waterline, most stability, and still yet faster progress, all else
being equal. And as long as they're there, the space between the
fairings serves as stowage for things that don't mind getting wet.
You woudln't be able to use them even if they were part of the hull
proper, cause you can't fit, so why bother trying to make them dry in
the first place?
(this is actually literally what he had in mind. Surf, I think, a
little 15 footer, was developed from just that thinking--he describes
her genisis as putting a bit of fairing ahead and astern of this
smaller, square, very practical and able dinghy (name?) that he'd
already designed, keep the same rig, and get a much faster, more
stable boat, with the same sprawing space and maybe more, for hardly
any extra cost.
Some people call him a genius. I just think he has yet to meet an
assumption he could stand not to question. (Maybe that is genius...)
John O'Neill
--- In bolger@y..., StepHydro@a... wrote:
> In a message dated 02/09/2001 10:<BR02:<BR58 PM
> Eastern Standard, bgn@m... writes:
> > What purpose does the openings in the bow of the Mirco and other
> > Bolger designs serve? It just seens that a designer would want
to
> > limit the amount of water entering the hull.
>
> Bill,
>
> You came frightenly close to answring your own question. This
reminds me of
> the oft told story
In a message dated 02/09/2001 10:<BR02:<BR58 PM
Eastern Standard,bgn@...writes:
You came frightenly close to answring your own question. This reminds me of
the oft told story that Aristarchus of Samos would have invented the calculus
more than a millenium ahead of Newton if he had just extended his thinking a
bit ahead of where he was when determining the value of Pi to greater
precision by dividing the circle into ever greater numbers of wedges...but I
digress.
Designers have found just in the recent couple of decades that boats and
wtaer have an intrinsic connection...nearly astral. Therefore water *can't*
be excluded!! They now try to *limit* the amount of water that can enter,
just as you nearly postulated. It has been found that if just the amount of
water contained on anchors, muddy boots, wet swimwear, and a bit of
splash-in, then the *natural* requirement is met and the boat is much less
likely to ever get enough water inside to sink. This is much like the
argument (and has about the same degree of validity) that "Water seeks its
own level."
These front and rear compartments are nowadays sealed off from the rest of
the boat, so the integrity of the boat isn't breached. It is found that the
compartments are useful for containing spilled fuel from outboards, though
there has been no indication of astral connections between fuel and
boats...as a matter of fact, there is a good portion of the boating
intelligentia that believes that the opposite is true. They also serve to let
masts in tabernacles swing into register without providing a
difficult-to-seal slot in the foredeck. Additionally, they sometimes form
boarding steps.
So, you see you didn't miss anything...you just stopped theorizing a bit too
soon. Put yourself in the company of Aristarchus...smart man he.
Cheers/Carron
Eastern Standard,bgn@...writes:
> What purpose does the openings in the bow of the Mirco and otherBill,
> Bolger designs serve? It just seens that a designer would want to
> limit the amount of water entering the hull.
You came frightenly close to answring your own question. This reminds me of
the oft told story that Aristarchus of Samos would have invented the calculus
more than a millenium ahead of Newton if he had just extended his thinking a
bit ahead of where he was when determining the value of Pi to greater
precision by dividing the circle into ever greater numbers of wedges...but I
digress.
Designers have found just in the recent couple of decades that boats and
wtaer have an intrinsic connection...nearly astral. Therefore water *can't*
be excluded!! They now try to *limit* the amount of water that can enter,
just as you nearly postulated. It has been found that if just the amount of
water contained on anchors, muddy boots, wet swimwear, and a bit of
splash-in, then the *natural* requirement is met and the boat is much less
likely to ever get enough water inside to sink. This is much like the
argument (and has about the same degree of validity) that "Water seeks its
own level."
These front and rear compartments are nowadays sealed off from the rest of
the boat, so the integrity of the boat isn't breached. It is found that the
compartments are useful for containing spilled fuel from outboards, though
there has been no indication of astral connections between fuel and
boats...as a matter of fact, there is a good portion of the boating
intelligentia that believes that the opposite is true. They also serve to let
masts in tabernacles swing into register without providing a
difficult-to-seal slot in the foredeck. Additionally, they sometimes form
boarding steps.
So, you see you didn't miss anything...you just stopped theorizing a bit too
soon. Put yourself in the company of Aristarchus...smart man he.
Cheers/Carron