It's about plans...for a sailing tender...lapstrake construction

[Phillip Allen]

I ordered a book and plans from an internet source. I've been in construction for many years and can read blue prints...I even remember when they were actually blue. What I got is an artist rendering and instructions to "scale the print" which is the opposite instruction on literally every print I've ever seen in construction. Everyone I've shown them to (the two sheets called plans) laughs and says I ought to frame them. I can build the tender, of course, but I have to get over my disappointment first and then resolve myself to building on my own...no one telling me to "make the board look like this, nail it (glue it, fasten it, etc) here..." There doesn't seem to be anyone near enough to go and look at their work so this will be pretty blind...

[Jack Heinlen]

What's the boat? Sounds like you got scammed. A decent set of plans ought to contain at least a profile, simple lines plan, construction details and a table of offsets. A builder experienced in the type can build from the offsets. Many designers now include full sized patterns for stem and molds. While it does depend on the boat, a drawing with instruction to scale the dimensions is not a set of plans.

[ 10-31-2004, 07:29 PM: Message edited by: Jack Heinlen ]

[Phillip Allen]

I hesitate to name the source lest I find that a host of Art-speak responders tell me that that's the way it is done and I end up looking as naive as I may very well be. I can build a multimillion dollar building but can't put together a ten foot boat. Mostly I'm missing a thorough understanding of the jargon. I've helped build buildings in other countries where I don't speak the language (two countries, two languages) but dimensions is dimensions, English to metric is a no-brainer and I only needed to look up and learn a very few words to understand the prints as much as I needed to. It is also likely I HAVE missed some understanding...but I'm stubborn. It’s really only a small mental set-back.

[Jack Heinlen]

Have a read through John Gardner's "Building Traditional Small Craft."

[Phillip Allen]

I'll check for it at Barns & Noble

[imported_Steven Bauer]

There is also lots of good Info in Iain Oughtred's book.

http://www.woodenboatstore.com/store/images/325116.JPG

The WoodenBoat Store has it.

Steven

[NormMessinger]

It sure does not sound like the way it is done to me, Phillip. Go ahead and name the boat and designer. I promise Cleek will go easy on you. Surely.

[Frank Wentzel]

Phil

I don't think you will get a "that's how its done" from the Forumites. I bought Steve Redmond's plans for the "Whisp". It was only two pages (it was also only $27), but these plans included:
-- Full sized patterns for the inner and outer stem, the transom and the tiller and rudder.
-- Construction details and measurements for the other components.
-- Spar diagrams and brief instructions to the sailmaker.
-- Assembly instructions and a number of detail drawings to get you through the rough spots (even a detail on how to cut gains including a recommendation on what plane to use).

I am sure I will have quite a few head-scratching moments - I have worked on a number of boats but I've never actually built one. But the plans have all you need, based on the assumption that you can do some woodworking and you have an idea what a boat should look like. It doesn't sound like your plans rise to that level.

So don't feel embarassed about your complaints. I think you have good reason to complain.

/// Frank ///

[Phillip Allen]

I have a twenty plus year old set of plans for a Weekender Frindship sloop which actually look like plans and had something to do with my expecting actual drawing of individual parts of the tender...it's on the order of a sixteen foot boat. Maybe I should build that one first. It is larger with a cuddy cabin and gaff rigged with sprit, actual dead eyes and tarpolin sails. The tender (in the pictures) is so good-looking I thought of starting with it. In any event, the two boats do not compliment one another...just two different boats of roughly the same utility as far as sailing goes (I'll be learning the finer points of sailing on which ever.)

[Keith Wilson]

At the very least, you should have a table of offsets so you can loft it, and materials and sizes for the various parts (for example: stem white oak, sided 1-1/2; transom mahogany 1" thick). You shouldn't have to scale the drawing for anything really critical that can be dimensioned with one number. Complex curves you'll generally get off the lofting.

That said, the amount of detail on even normal boat plans does seem pretty minimal. I deal with drawings for machined parts all the time, and if you EVER have to scale a drawing, somebody hasn't done his job.

And please, please, tell us what boat it is, so we'll know what we're getting if we ever order plans for it.

[Phillip Allen]

I got the tender plans from Duck Trap. They have a very good web site and lots of photos. I really just wanted more detail for a license fee. I had met with a man I know who does what I call art-speak and gives everything an arcane mystique and it always annoys me even to have it applied to my own craft (I'm a mason...brick layer, block layer, rock layer...etc). It requires enough to be a good craftsman without adding the unnecessary art-speak designed to befuddle the layman and give the apprentice airs. I got enough from them to build the boat but I think it would be un-necessarily hard for a lot of hobbyists. I’ll have to draw up a set of plans and I’m just not in the mood these days…winter’s a commin though.

[mmd]

I guess a cynical reply from a designer might be, "Dimensions don't matter 'cause nobody pays attention to 'em anyway!" (Reference to all those posts along the lines of, "Is it okay if I stretch the mould spacing by 25% and the beam by 15% and make it out of birch ply instead of cedar planks?") tongue.gif :D

But seriously, if the plans are as uninformative and incomplete as you describe, the designer is a poor representative of all us other designers who try to provide you folks with the real stuff that dreams are made of. Personally, I would gladly refund your money and postage rather than have you so unsatisfied that you would speak of my work thusly in public. But that's just me.

(P.S. - For those who don't know, it is common practice to dimension drawings thoroughly enough so that the builder never, never has to scale any important dimension from the drawings. Paper changes dimension with fluctuations in humidity levels (more in one direction that the other, according to the "grain" of the paper), so scaled measurements - especially of small-scale drawings - are always to be suspect.)

[gert]

actualy the mast step and partner location on Joel White's Shearwater plans had to be scaled and there was no rigging details whatsoever and I would call the plans "excelent" (had to be I managed built a boat from them) A lot is assumed by the designers but Ian's book IS mandatory.

[Phillip Allen]

"a lot is assumed by the designers" This is probably so but in my trade, architects may assume I know my craft as in how to lay brick, but they should not and do not assume I know what they want me to build with the brick I lay. I'm sorry if my words sound too strong but with a set of prints in hand, I would be on the phone requiring him to send me a drawing before work could proceed...but then we will both have signed contracts.

[Keith Wilson]

mmd's exactly right about scaling drawings. In fact, a very common note to find in the title block right next to the company's name is "DO NOT SCALE DRAWING". And, Phillip, I have probably even less patience with "art-speak" than you do. I'm a mechanical engineer, not a real volatile sort of guy, but the closest I ever came to actually punching somebody at work was an industrial designer who thought he was an Artiste - #*$&%@&!!!!

Well, whatever the deficiencies in the plans, that's one lovely little boat. I think if you build one, it'll be worth the effort.

http://www.duck-trap.com/jj-sun2.jpg

[cs]

I also work in the plans buisness, architural, and we strive to make sure that nothing is scaled off. I've seen situations where engineers have sent us plans and the scale be off by 4' in 30'. Never ever scale a plan.

In defense of boat plans, I think a lot of these guys tend to leave it to the eye, if it looks right it is right, and they build more by feel than by tape.

Chad

[Phillip Allen]

You are probably right. When It's finally built I'll likely be thinking..."that wasn't so bad; I had over-reacted"

[Phillip Allen]

I guess I'll go out to the shop and cast some balls for the little .40 cal flintlock I built "by feel and not by tape" smile.gif

[mwybo]

Phil,
I recently acquired these same plans and had the same reaction. The clincher for me was the text stating that there were several known errors in the table of offsets, some as much as 1/4 inch, but that they should become apparent at lofting. My reaction was if you know they are there why not fix them. I like the design but I would rather build the boat than try to guess at what the designer really meant by some arcane phrase or inconsistent use of terms.

Mike

[Cosmo Lengro]

Art-speak Can you please define this term and give me an example or two?

Thanx.

[dmede]

Duck Trap Press? Walter Simmons? I am not surprised by your frustration at the plans you received.

I built a 15' glued lap canoe to a set of Duck Trap plans and I had one hell of a time figuring them out. You should be happy there are no written instructions for this boat. I had the "building lap canoes" to go along with my plans and it only made things worse. As long as you have offsets you can get your building instructions from other texts, as I did. Greg Rossels "building small boats" and John Gardners "the dory book" are good sources for small boat building.

I will say one thing in defense of Mr. Simmons, he is prompt with his email replies and as long as you have specific quesitons to ask you will get very good answers. He knows how to build boats just not how to write about it.

[Phillip Allen]

"Art-speak" (example) a ready made glass aquarium with three basketballs held submerged by monofilament sold for many thousands of $ at Christie's. When The "artist" was asked to explain he said "This "work" represents man's "triplicity" of blah, blah, blah...”(art speak) Attempts (which are successful depending on whom the interlocutor is) to inflate the value of ordinary things...three basketballs, an aquarium...the buyer furnishes the water. Someone told me the artist's name is what added the value. It made me realize that some of the more legitimate art is, after all, con-art. I do art-speak myself (defacto) but I do it for fun, not to get money from fools. I have a very good vocabulary (even if ah kain’t spell) and encourage my granddaughter to pick up as much as she can. The other day she received a poor grade because her teacher decided her vocabulary was to “lofty” for her age…so much for the NEA (dumb them all down so the dumb ones won’t look bad.).

[ 11-02-2004, 05:49 AM: Message edited by: Phillip Allen ]

[JimConlin]

If the designer is dead and gone, and there are errors in the table of offsets, then I have nobody to complain to. OTOH, if a living person is taking my money for a table of offsets and then admits that there are errors which have not been corrected, I'd be disappointed.

As a separate issue, It seems to be rare for designers to publish the 'lining off' of lapstrake boats. I wish it were otherwise, but it isn't. I will sing the praises of those who do (without errors in 'em).