How to build Atkin's "Maid of Endor"

[ken.bryant]

I just got the plans for "Maid of Endor". I've never built anything larger than a kayak (and the kayak's not finished yet!), and I know I don't yet have the experience to build "Endor"; but for various reasons I've decided it's the boat for me, and I'm prepared to move VERY slowly (confident I can get all the advice I need right here on the forum...).

So: two questions at this stage (as I sit here planning how to plan how to plan...)

(1) Should I plan on building rightside up or upside down? The plans say nothing about construction; my sense, from reading Chappelle's book and Roessel's book, is that this boat is on the borderline as far as size goes... (5200 pounds).

(2) The boat is not entirely different in scale from the Herreshoff/White Flatfish, which in turn is presumably built in similar fashion to the (smaller) Herreshoff/White Haven 12.5. The point of this (well, maybe it's a point) is this: I find appealing the style of construction described in "How to Build the Haven 12 1/2 Footer", in which upside-down construction is combined with installing all bent frames (not just those at the stations) on the molds, THEN doing the final assembly of the molds, and planking right over the frames -- rather than bending the frames into the planked boat. This means more molds (twice as many, I guess), and deriving more sections from the lofting -- but to an inexperienced builder like me, it would seem to leave less room for error. So the question: Could I build this boat that way? Would I ever be able to get it turned upright?

Any other suggestions welcome. I'm hoping the suggestions won't be "don't build that boat" --- after all, that's what the "Design" forum is for... smile.gif

[JimD]

Hard to imagine anyone trying to tell you not to build Maid of Endor, especially after you build your practice boat first.

[StevenBauer]

Have you read Bud macintosh's "How To Build A Wooden Boat" yet?

http://www.woodenboatstore.com/images/325075.JPG

If not, it's a must read. smile.gif

Steven

[StevenBauer]

She really is a beauty!

http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Sail/images/MaidOfEndor-1.gif

http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Sail/images/MaidOfEndor-3.gif

http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Sail/images/MaidOfEndor-2.gif

""In one sense, however, she is an unbelievable bargain, for this is a real ship, and you won't find a ship for less money. She'd be tough as nails, easy to handle, and a joy to behold forever. She'd also be a good investment, for unlike most 'character boats', her appeal would be universal. There is no trace of the throwback or freak In her.

Although complex, she has great appeal as a building project because she is not large. If one botched the biggest timber in her, it could go to the shop stove without too much regret.

"Her accommodations are serviceable and well laid-out, but they have been kept modest, so that.they do not overpower the overall appearance, feel, and function of the boat.

"Maid of Endor would be safe, able, and great fun for one or two people who know the way of a ship. What else is there?" (Wooden Boat, May/June, 1978) "

I'll definitely look forward to following your building progress.

Steven

[ken.bryant]

She is indeed a beauty. Thanks for the book recommendation, Steve; I just ordered it from Amazon.

Now struggling with decisions on lumber to buy. The main piece of the keel is 3.5 x 6" white oak 14' long. Nothing like that available out here. Looks like I'm going with old-growth doug fir, which will be green when I get it -- I'll sticker it and pray.

Found a place to cast the keel; I'm not big on playing with liquid lead...

[JimD]

I second the motion for Bud McIntosh's book. Someone else once pointed out that it is not so much a book on how to build wooden boats in general but more a book on how to build a particular wooden boat a particular way. In fact Bud says as much in the foreword. The boat used to illustrate the building process throughout is Merrywing, designed by Bud, which is 39' long, much larger than than Maid of Endor. So the hull is built right side up with the frames bent into the ribbands so you'd have to consult other books to build upside down. But aside from that almost everything in the book is geared to building a traditional carvel hull not so different from the Atkin design.

[ 12-09-2005, 06:10 PM: Message edited by: JimD ]

[RodB]

What a great choice. Good luck,

RB

[WFK]

Ken, that really is a sweet little boat. Did you buy chance contact these people for a potential lumber source?
http://www.edensaw.com/

Bill

[achue]

Hey Bill, can a person buy from them online or do you have to call or go in? I can't get into their links...
Andy

[ken.bryant]

I think the local equivalent might be:

http://www.westwindhardwood.com/

[Paul Denison]

Look here:
http://www.woodenboat-ubb.com/ubb/ultim atebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=001421 (http://www.woodenboat-ubb.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=001421)

You may be able to find a copy of this:

Boat Design Quarterly 6 Apr-94 3 Maid of Endor John Atkin's classic
Review of boat building plans Atkin, John

[ 12-09-2005, 11:32 PM: Message edited by: Paul Denison ]

[ken.bryant]

Many thanks to all, and especially to Steven for recommending the Macintosh book. I got my copy today, and it's better than all the others put together for the practical details -- such as fitting deadwood to ballast keel, making a mold for having a keel poured, how to move around heavy timbers and ballast, what grain orientation and how much seasoning is needed for keel and sternpost timbers, etc. How I ever would have solved any of those problems on a first boat using the other books, I have no idea...

I'm sure part of the reason you suggested this book is also that it uses for its example a boat similar in construction to (though much larger than) Maid of Endor. So my questions from this posting are all answered (along with lots of other questions I didn't even know how to ask yet).

I'm going to use flitch-cut, green douglas fir (I've got a supplier on Vancouver Island) for backbone and for bottomside planking, red cedar for the upper strakes, and pacific yew for steamed frames; edgegrain fir for a laid deck (yes, I know, but I WANT a laid deck...) All local woods. I think I'll continue the "local woods" theme for trim too, though I don't know just what as yet.

[StevenBauer]

Glad it'll be a help to you Ken. I don't actually own a copy, I borrowed a friend's copy and he made me give it back when I was done. smile.gif The book started out as a series of articles in WoodenBoat, then evolved into the book. The illustrations are by Sam Manning, the best.

Steven

[Norske3]

And use "Red Lead" on the bones....heavy saturation on the ends. smile.gif http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Photos/MaidOfEndor/Robelia-2.jpg RED LEAD THREAD.here. smile.gif web page (http://www.woodenboat-ubb.com/cgi-bin/UBB/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=004850&p=)

[ 12-16-2005, 08:38 AM: Message edited by: Norske3 ]

[Venchka]

Black locust where appropriate. It may not grow on the island, but it does grow in the northwest.

Any book illustrated by Sam Manning is worth the price.

Good luck. Post pictures!

Wayne
In Texas. :D

[ken.bryant]

Black locust...Local lumberyards may fail me here.

By the way, I find no "hackamatack" postings, though books tell me there are mailorder sources. Has hackmatack for knees become like the unicorn?

I'll definitely post pictures -- a blog or something -- once I actually start doing something photogenic. Photos of me doing a "pre-lofting" on a three-foot-long sheet of paper, or talking on the telephone to lumberyards, may be of limited audience, though...

[ken.bryant]

By the way, thanks Paul for the Boat Design Quarterly reference. I just ordered that from our sponsor, along with "How to Build the Catspaw Dinghy". I'm going to build that dinghy, while I muse about the bigger project, so I have some small-scale carvel practise.

[WWheeler]

Ken,

Being in Vancouver, you should be thinking yellow cedar and douglas fir.

[Keith Wilson]

Hackmatack is a barbarous Maineism for Tamarack or Larch.

[ken.bryant]

So any idea about sources for unbarbarous Tamarack or Larch knees?

Doug fir and yellow cedar for sure. The only boat I've built (a frame-and-skin kayak) uses yellow cedar. It's great to work with.

[Joe ( Cold Spring on Hudson )]

No I dont Ken, but I do know where you can get a cool 1/2 hull.

http://www.woodenboatstore.com/images/620061.jpg
From our very own sponsors Wooden Boat Store. Its a simple must have for inspiration and then to hang in the salon ;)

Sure is a pretty boat
http://www.woodenboatstore.com/prodinfo.asp?number=620-061

[ken.bryant]

And I see I can own it for a mere $950... (I know that doesn't seem like much in the US, but by the time you convert it to loons it adds up...)

Beautiful job, though.

[Carlsboats]

This is a lovely boat, and I think it is entirely practical to build it Herreshoff style, upside down with frames bent on the molds. I just finished doing a boat that way -- the Block Island 19, a slightly smaller version of the Flatfish: (Steve Bauer recently posted some pix of it on the Forum under Building/Repair). The turn over is obviously a problem, but with this hull shape, it is easy enough to make a rollover cradle, and the hull weighs far less than the final boat, as you are dealing with only a raw poanked shell, lacking lead ballast and deck. A lot depends on the building location. If indoors, would you be able to rig an overhead chain hoist or a couple of 5-6 part purchases? If outdoors, could you bring in a small crane? We did our boat by hand, indoors, but our hull weighed less than 1000 pounds at that stage.
Yes, you need more molds to do a plank-on-frame hull with frames bent on the molds -- my guess is about 20 for this boat. Making those molds, for someone who has not done this before, would take about 10 work days. In the grand scheme of things that is not much, and you will probably get it back in the ease of planking upside down. And a big item to me: This is the easy way to fair a hull. It is a real stinker to do this an upright hull, when there is reverse curve in the bilges. On the negative side, it is kind of tedious fitting and hanging the ballast and deadwood after the boat is rolled upright.
As for the keel, one option is to lami

[Carlsboats]

This is a lovely boat, and I think it is entirely practical to build it Herreshoff style, upside down with frames bent on the molds. I just finished doing a boat that way -- the Block Island 19, a slightly smaller version of the Flatfish: (Steve Bauer recently posted some pix of it on the Forum under Building/Repair). The turn over is obviously a problem, but with this hull shape, it is easy enough to make a rollover cradle, and the hull weighs far less than the final boat, as you are dealing with only a raw poanked shell, lacking lead ballast and deck. A lot depends on the building location. If indoors, would you be able to rig an overhead chain hoist or a couple of 5-6 part purchases? If outdoors, could you bring in a small crane? We did our boat by hand, indoors, but our hull weighed less than 1000 pounds at that stage.
Yes, you need more molds to do a plank-on-frame hull with frames bent on the molds -- my guess is about 20 for this boat. Making those molds, for someone who has not done this before, would take about 10 work days. In the grand scheme of things that is not much, and you will probably get it back in the ease of planking upside down. And a big item to me: This is the easy way to fair a hull. It is a real stinker to do this an upright hull, when there is reverse curve in the bilges. On the negative side, it is kind of tedious fitting and hanging the ballast and deadwood after the boat is rolled upright.
As for the keel, if you don't have the right air-dried wood to work with, an option is to laminate it in place. If you use a truly waterproof glue, resorcinol resin, and the correct wood, the keel should outlast you and me both, and all our children.

[ken.bryant]

Many thanks Carl. I've been following the descriptions of your extraordinarily beautiful boat in the other discussions.

Before your post, I had reached the conclusion that the only sensible thing to do was build it upright. Now I have to go back to considering the fact that there are two sensible possibilities.

I'm going to build it outside; my shop is nineteen feet long, and the boat is twenty. So I can manufacture parts inside, and keep my (all hand!) tools inside, but the assembly is going to be in a roughly thirty-by-thirty foot, sloping outdoor space. It will be centered in an unpaved driveway, so truck/crane access should be easy enough; though on an island where finding such resources, or bringing them in by ferry, is a little tricky.

Clearly the next thing I have to do is sit down and estimate the actual materials, and their weight, and figure out how heavy this thing will be pre-ballast.

Either way I build it, I've been planning to sink a bunch of heavy posts -- some down the center (using the slope of the land to match the "slope" of the keel, if I build it upright) to support the keel and molds, other tall ones at the two ends, between which I had planned (in upright construction) to hang a plywood-boxed "strongback" -- in this case, really more of a "roofbeam" to keep the tops of the molds in line. I'd also planned for some guyed posts to each side, as anchors for turning a backbone-and-ballast over, etc. Perhaps those could be used for a rollover of the pre-ballast hull. I have to get out my old physics books (I think old physics should be all I need for something this scale smile.gif ) and see if I can figure out the sideways forces that would be applied to those posts.

Having never planked a boat, or bent a rib bigger than a kayak rib, my reading has already convinced me that the shape of this boat is on the complicated end, and that I'm going to need all the help I can get at the bending and planking stages. Working with gravity seems a sensible approach; the sad fact is that this means working against gravity at later stages...

I think I'm going to work up some drawings of the proposed foundation both ways, and hope that you and others will then point out the follies of both.

Thanks again.

[ 12-16-2005, 10:11 PM: Message edited by: ken.bryant ]

[ken.bryant]

As to wood: after talking to a local professional builder, and reading Bud McIntosh's book, I'm persuaded (unless you guys unpersuade me!) that buying sopping wet fresh-cut doug fir (which I can get out here on two-week notice -- there are some advantages to living on the wet coast!), and stickering it for a year so it doesn't absolutely puddle, should work fine. I'm going to buy two flitches, from opposite sides of the same tree, either thick enough for the keel; then after a year take the one that stays straightest for the keel, and cut stem and sternpost out of the other.

That's the theory, anyhow. See problems? (I get in this "this is how I'm gonna do it" mode, with the risk of sounding as if I knew what I'm doing. So far I'm an armchair builder. Sigh. It's an occupational hazard...)

[ken.bryant]

That came out wrong: the point of taking the "less straight" timber for stem and sternpost is not that they need to be any less straight, but just that they don't need to be as thick, so there's more room to plane out any bow or cup. (Hand-planing boards, now: that's the one thing I actually DO have lots of experience with...)

[OEX]

Hackmatack knees are available from a fellow in Maine---he cuts them as you like---he has ads in WB or Good Old Boat. Remember Hackmatack is not very rot resistant and not as dimensionally stable as some (esp. Black Locust)
Bending: You will not have a hard time steaming and bending anything for this boat, its not big. I re-framed and sistered my 34 cutter in 2 1/4" X 2 1/4 Black locust---bent very well and we tended to not steam them as long as we could have. Even the short sister bent well enough.

I have all the black locust you could want, but I am in CT---it’s yours if you find a way, been on the ground in logs for 2-3 years. I am rebuilding the stanchions, covering boards, stern beams, knees, etc all in Black locust----it is very heavy so use it more under the water line. i.e I did my floor timbers in it too.

If you want to post you building log on my website you can www.woodenboatrescue.org (http://www.woodenboatrescue.org)

Love this boat and glad to see someone on one.

Cheers, Bruce

p.s. just googled to find Newman’s Knees http://www.newmansknees.com/

[submariner]

I am cutting lumber in preparation for building a Maid of Endor. What is the plank thickness and how thick should I mill the boards for planking? The trees are Doug Fir. I don't have the plans yet and am looking to get started on the lumber. Thanks for any help!

[donald branscom]

MAKE SURE you build the boat right side up.

Do not raise the cabin at all .

If you build THAT boat you will have the achievement that is
something many boat builders would want if they had a second chance.

[pcford]

I am cutting lumber in preparation for building a Maid of Endor. What is the plank thickness and how thick should I mill the boards for planking? The trees are Doug Fir. I don't have the plans yet and am looking to get started on the lumber. Thanks for any help!

Aren't you getting a bit ahead of yourself? One would think you should have plans in hand before you start cutting.

Just a thought.

[submariner]

Well maybe most people have plans before getting lumber but this project is still several years out. I'm cutting green trees and will let them sit while I do several other boats. The logs are on the ground, and I'd like some insight into how thick the planking stock should be milled to avoid to much wear on the thickness planer when the time comes. A ballpark figure would do nicely if nobody knows the true dimension. Thanks!

[JimD]

Well maybe most people have plans before getting lumber but this project is still several years out. I'm cutting green trees and will let them sit while I do several other boats. The logs are on the ground, and I'd like some insight into how thick the planking stock should be milled to avoid to much wear on the thickness planer when the time comes. A ballpark figure would do nicely if nobody knows the true dimension. Thanks!

Several other boats first, eh? This oughta be fun. I'll check back in a few years. That seems fair considering you resurrected a thread that has been dormant since 2005. Bon chance.

[dennisbur]

HI Ken:

I'll have some spare time this fall if you want help with those ribs.

Dennis

[JimD]

HI Ken:

I'll have some spare time this fall if you want help with those ribs.

Dennis

Ken hasn't posted in three and a half years but I'm sure he'd appreciate your offer.

[StevenBauer]

Is anyone in touch with Ken? Seems like he hasn't posted in almost 3 years. :(


Steven

[Dave Gray]

Submariner - Buy the plans to see how thick the planks need to be. One of the Woodenboat study plan books has a reprint of an article, printed in WB magazine, by Joel White discussing how to estimate lumber requirements for building Sallee Rover. If you are really planning to build M of E, that would be a good place to start.

[Candyfloss]

Ken, here is a link to Alex's "Cockle" build, He built it upside down & had one heck of a party on turnover day. I did the same thing with my 25footer. Sure makes fairing it a lot easier.

http://www.woodenboat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=88301

And this is us carrying "Candyfloss" out of the shed on turnover day. You may need a few more guys.....


http://pic50.picturetrail.com/VOL458/12377907/22018548/371615062.jpg

[James McMullen]

Any hull you can manage to find a way to build upside down is much better* built upside down. With a boat as small as MoE, there is no reason whatsoever to not build her so, and then flip her rightside up when the time comes.


*more secure set-up of station molds and baseline, better sight lines for lining off, easier to plank, more convenient to caulk and to paint, more pleasant all the way around.

[donald branscom]

Hmmm - right-side-up or upside down is a good question. I assume the 5200lb is with the keel ballast attached, which would only be attached once it's standing up the right way, so if built upside down it would be about 1500 lb lighter I guess? Golant Gaffers are much the same size and are built upside down (strip plank on ply bulkheads though) so turning her should be possible.


OK I NEED TO CHANGE MY OPINION.
You can build it upside down, but only up to a certain point.
Then it will need to be turned over.

[JimD]

Lovely boat, but...if everyone who ever said they were going to build a M of E actually did the sea lanes would be choked with them. Anyone know of any of these boats currently or recently under construction? Fact is its a difficult, expensive little ship to build and almost anyone who has the wherewithall to build one will end up going for something bigger and roomier.

[Bob Cleek]

Lovely boat, but...if everyone who ever said they were going to build a M of E actually did the sea lanes would be choked with them. Anyone know of any of these boats currently or recently under construction? Fact is its a difficult, expensive little ship to build and almost anyone who has the wherewithall to build one will end up going for something bigger and roomier.

Jim took the words right out of my mouth. Maid of Endor is a beautiful design, to be sure, but remember her heritage. Atkin was grinding out a "build it yourself" design a month for MoTorBoaTing Magazine back in the day. Some "hit," some "missed." Endor was a hit in many ways, but a "miss" in the practical sense. Read excerpts from Atkin's own commentary on the design when first published:

"Maid of Endor would be neither inexpensive nor quick and simple to build. She has practically every structural member that a boat three times her size would have, and except for their smaller size they would be about as difficult to construct."

"Endor" is a "character boat," in other words, a "minature" or "sailing model" which evokes the sense of a much larger boat. In that respect, she is one of the best. Beyond that, there are many other designs which will cost about as much to build, time being the same and materials only slightly more costly, such as the Hess "Serrafyn" (which itself was supplanted by the slightly larger and much more practical "Taliesin") or renouned Giles "Vertue." Remember that volume increases roughly as the cube of length, breadth and depth dimensions. Five feet more of length will net you maybe three times the interior space, yet be no more work to build and very little more cost in materials. Thus, you will see a lot more boats of this type (Itchen Ferry smacks... sorry, NOT "Bristol Channel pilot cutters!") in the 25' to 30' range.

Still and all, Maid is a very worthwhile project, but not for the tyro. You will have to apply all the traditional boatbuilding skills necessary to build a larger boat.

Some comments:

I would approach building via the "Herreshoff upside down method" with caution. That is a great way to build a boat if the boat is designed for it. This boat was not designed for this construction method. Herreshoff's were designed for inverted planking when built that way. Herreshoff's upside-downers had light scantlings and the method permitted this. Endor, relatively speaking, is NOT a "lightly built" boat. She's a "big heavy" boat, only smaller.

The Herreshoff method was conceived for PRODUCTION construction. It's greatest advantage is only realized when one is building multiple hulls on the same jigs and the time and materials invested in the jigs are amortized by their use on multiple builds.

Herreshoff's inverted mold system works well with riveted fastening, which is perhaps it's greatest advantage. It is easier to plank with the hull inverted, for sure, and particularly with a shape like Endor's, which has a lot of flat run below the turn of the bilge. If Endor is built right side up, I'd say her keel should be high enough on the stocks to allow one to work beneath the turn of the bilge without laying flat out on a crawler! If built upside down, some system for flipping her over and setting her down on the ballast keel will have to be engineered, but may be worth the trouble, all things considered. Do read "How to Build the Columbia Dinghy," a WB publication, which is essentially a detailed "how to" on the Herreshoff inverted mold system as described by one of Herreshoff's long-time employees who used it for many years.

As for crapamatack or whatever, you've got some larch in your neck of the woods for sure. Myself, I can't see how digging out the stumps for knees is worth the trouble unless you've got heavy stump-pulling equipment and so on. For compass timber, you shouldn't have much trouble finding some decent Gary oak (white) in the Pacific Northwest, although I don't think it's commercially harvested much. Your larch (tamarack) makes excellent plank, as does Alaskan yellow cedar and Port Orford cedar (hard to come by, but occasionally around). These are also excellend deck planking species. Good for you that you are going with a proper laid deck. It won't be so prone to leak and a lot easier to maintain. (On a boat like Endor, plywood should be avoided to the greatest extent possible. She's all about the subtlties of fit and finish.) You could also use Doug fir, although it's a bit heavy and harder to work for a boat your size and sometimes more difficult to finish well.

What you do as to wood is "get off the grid." You won't find the best wood in lumberyards, and maybe not even at the specialty suppliers. Find a guy who knows the loggers, like Bob Smalser here in the forum. He should be able to turn you on to small scale loggers who can keep an eye out for good boatbuilding stock. Buy direct from them raw "flitch cut," not dimensioned square on all sides. This is just slabbed plank with the bark still on it. You'll want curved flitches so you can cut out plank with a minimum of waste and you'll want it quarter sawn. You'll pay a lot more for that sort of stuff at the yard. You'll be amazed at the savings direct from the sawyer. Get a good HEAVY thickness planer so you can finish your own wood and you will save enough to buy all the power tools you'll ever need. (NOT one of those Home Despot "lunch box" toys... get a real 15" stationary 220 volt motored number... Maybe the Grizzly warehouse outlet up there has a "dented and scratched" one cheap at their next parking lot sale... check them out.) Planing your own wood will also ensure you always have the right size stock on hand.

As to plank, perhaps this is obvious, but I'll mention that you will need plank thicker than the nominal thickness indicated in the scantlings. You must allow for backing out space along the way. If you buy flitch cut stock and have your own thickness planer, this isn't a problem.

As for building outdoors... if at all possible, DON'T! You should be able to build a temporary plastic tarp covered lean-to out from the doors of your shop, such that any part of the hull that won't fit in your shop is hanging out the door and covered. The climate control you will have and just being "out of the elements" will be worth their weight in gold. Building outdoors is a royal PIA!

While you are in the bookstores, or from WB, get a copy of Larry Pardey's "Classic Boat Construction - the Hull." It is somewhat dear at about sixty bucks, but you will find it invaluable. It is a step-by-step analysis of his construction of "Taliesin," essentially a 30+ foot version of Maid of Endor. He's solved all the problems you will encounter. Worth the price of admission.

Finally, before you start buying much of anything, I'd urge you to build a model of Maid of Endor EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE ORIGINAL. Take your plans and figure to build at 1 or even 2 inches to the foot scale. At 2" you'd have a 40" model, but it will be easier to build for these purposes. First, loft the entire boat on paper as you would the full-size version. Second, build the model in the same fashion as you would the full-size one. You will then have a model to inspire you as you work on the big girl, but you will already have made all your mistakes on the model, not the full-size boat. You will know how the planks are shaped and which ones will be the buggers to fit. More importantly, you will get a sense of what is the best order of construction. It's one thing to "paint yourself into a corner" on a model and another on a full-sized boat. Questions like whether you should leave the transom off to make running the clamps in full length first and things like that are easy to determine on the model. A similar goof on the big boat may mean hours and hours more work to get around something that shouldn't have been installed first, or tearing out work already accomplished. Pardey's book, mentioned before, is particularly valuable in this respect.

Lastly, if you are building this jewel of a boat, if at all possible, build it the traditional way as befitting her design and character. Try as best you can to avoid epoxy adhesives, plywood, and stuff like that. Given her character and size, anything non-traditional is going to appear "larger than life" and jump right out at you, ruining her "character boat" effect. Also, in this regard, pay particular attention to the scale of fittings. It is easy to ruin the beauty of a boat like Maid of Endor by using fittings that are even just a bit too large (or small). Regrettably, in this day and age, it's hard enough finding proper bronze hardware, let alone in the size that may be required. This may require making your own patterns and having them cast (which isn't much more expensive than store-boughten if you finish the castings on your own time), but it will be worth it and the boat much more valuable in the end.

As you can see, everyone is enthusiastic about your plans, but I fear many are thinking, "Better him than me!" It's a big task and a labor of love. Consider the work carefully and, after you've built the model, if you still have the motivation... go for it!

[Bob Cleek]

"Either way I build it, I've been planning to sink a bunch of heavy posts -- some down the center (using the slope of the land to match the "slope" of the keel,..."

BTW, why bother? Get some solid timber cribbing, like old railroad ties, and stack them up in two piles. Lay a 12" steel "I" beam (which can be sold back to the steel yard when you're done) between the cribbing, leveled out with shims. That'll be your base line and it will stay level. If the cribbing moves at all over time, you can always stick a bottle jack under the "I" beam and adjust it with shims. This boat is too heavy for a post arrangement and the posts will settle and move at varying rates over time, giving you fits. When you launch, there won't be any posts to dig up, either!

BTW II: Take a look at Gilmer's "Blue Moon" (also available from WB) for another example of a similar character boat in the same vein as Maid of Endor. It may or may not be to your taste, but I expect you'll learn something about whichever one you build by comparing the two.

http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Sail/images/BenBow-1.gif

http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Sail/images/BenBow-2.gif

http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Sail/images/BenBow-3.gif

To illustrate my previous comments about length to volume comparisons, I presume you've also considered Atkin's "Ben Bow," which is essentially a 28' Maid of Endor (Or Maid of Endor is a 20' Ben Bow... I don't know which was the earlier design.) http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Sail/BenBow.html

Another eight feet and you are into a serious open ocean cruising cutter that would carry twice as many in much greater comfort and take just about anything you'd be likely to encounter. Taking Maid out on the open ocean in any kind of weather wouldn't be advisable. There is a point where the size of the boat limits the conditions under which she can be prudently sailed.

And speaking of Prudence...

http://im1.shutterfly.com/media/47b7cc24b3127ccec29ea3fbb82d00000010O00AbNnLhizaOW IPbz4S/cC/f%3D0/ps%3D50/r%3D0/rx%3D550/ry%3D400/

L.F.Herreshoff's "Prudence" is featured in his "Sensible Cruising Designs" and, at 23', will give you significantly more room for only three more feet of length and a much better level of performance. I've sailed both the Prudence and the Ben Bow designs, as well at Gilmer's "Blue Moon." Prudence is by far the thoroughbred of the bunch, performance-wise. It will likely also bring a higher resale value, all other things being equal, owing to her designer's reputation.

Far be it from me to be parading beautiful women before the groom during his bachelor party, though!

[JimD]

If I were ever to build something along the lines of Mof E (which I never will), that is a very small little ship, it would be Little Dipper, something of a scaled down Tally Ho at about 23.5 feet
To fill the want of a very little ship for the biggest kind of voyage. It has Atkin's endorsment as a true blue water boat and is as salty looking as any:

http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Sail/images/LittleDipper-1.gif

[boylesboats]

Lotsa boat to build, even if you haven't finish that kayak yet...:eek:

Most likely "Maid of Endor" could be built upright..

Without seeing the plan... Is its going to be strip planked or carvel planked?

Are you willing to build her in the next 10 years?

[Layzboy2011]

the prudence is a big boat(for 23'), I had the priveledge of owning one for a while, but I donated her because there wasnt much left buy the time I got her. I have never been on a maid of endor, but the prudence was the biggest 23' boat I have ever seen.

[donald branscom]

Lovely boat, but...if everyone who ever said they were going to build a M of E actually did the sea lanes would be choked with them. Anyone know of any of these boats currently or recently under construction? Fact is its a difficult, expensive little ship to build and almost anyone who has the wherewithall to build one will end up going for something bigger and roomier.

Sea lanes choked with Maid of Endors. What a vision!

Cash for clunkers program for boats??? Yes!

[Rob Hazard]

Mr Cleek, I noticed in one of your posts the statement that Herreshoff's inverted mold setup is well suited to riveted construction. Would you care to elaborate on that? I don't understand how you can rivet the planks to the frames if every frame is backed up by a building mold.

[Pugwash]

By Keith,

"Hackmatack is a barbarous Maineism for Tamarack or Larch."

Au contraire. I don't know the origin, but it was common in Michigan when I was growing up.

Larix is the generic name, within that, there are some 12 species of what is commonly known as "Larch".

There was a reason that Lineas came up with his wierd naming of plants, so that you can't say "Northern Ash" and mean something that has no relation to an Ash tree. I know it's folksy but it doesn't really help.

[Bob Cleek]

Mr Cleek, I noticed in one of your posts the statement that Herreshoff's inverted mold setup is well suited to riveted construction. Would you care to elaborate on that? I don't understand how you can rivet the planks to the frames if every frame is backed up by a building mold.

As I said, check out the book, "How to Build the Columbia Dinghy." It's a fascinating read.


Briefly, every OTHER frame is bent onto a mold. Plank is hung, with rivet nails driven through along the overlaps in clinker construction. (In carvel, I believe the nails ARE driven into, but not through, the frames backed by molds.) The hull is then turned right side up and the roves are placed over all the protruding nails and the nails cut and headed up. Then the frames between the molds are steamed in place and rivets placed on those frames. The molds are then removed, one at a time, and the frames on the molds riveted in turn. (Which, in a carvel job would require first driving the nails all the way through the plank and frame to be riveted after the mold is removed.)

[Richard Jones]

Ken, I was in your shoes back in 1990. Built a few little boats but nothing big. Got plans for George Stadel's 20' Pilot Sloop. Built it in the backyard over a period of 4 years. Built the cradle first, placed the 4"x6"x9' lead keel on that, than built the boat on top of that. No moving, no flipping. Steam bent the ribs, strip planked it with mahogany. "How to build a wooden boat" was a great help. Sold it after a few years to someone in Martha's Vineyard. Often wonder whatever became of her.

[donald branscom]

By Keith,

"Hackmatack is a barbarous Maineism for Tamarack or Larch."

Au contraire. I don't know the origin, but it was common in Michigan when I was growing up. A favored place to go for food and drink was the Hackmatack Inn, which has been there for a century under that name. Barbarous you accuse? Well, I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I know a few barbarous things which happened there. Does that count?

Maineacs???

[NYCKiwi]

As I said, check out the book, "How to Build the Columbia Dinghy." It's a fascinating read.

Hi Bob, Ive been looking for that title - looks very interesting. Could it be titled "How to Build the Catspaw Dinghy"?

[Ethan]

Hi Bob, Ive been looking for that title - looks very interesting. Could it be titled "How to Build the Catspaw Dinghy"?

It's actually called "Building the Herreshoff Dinghy". Here it is:

(click the pic)
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51ycgOPZgBL._SL500_AA240_.jpg (http://www.amazon.com/Building-Herreshoff-Dinghy-Manufacturers-Maritime/dp/0913372331/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1250206322&sr=8-1)

[Bob Cleek]

Hi Bob, Ive been looking for that title - looks very interesting. Could it be titled "How to Build the Catspaw Dinghy"?

The "Catspaw" book is specific to the Joel White (IIRC) Catspaw, which is an "interpretation" of the Herreshoff Columbia lifeboat. The "Columbia" book, as I recall without pulling it off the shelf, was published by Mystic Seaport, but I believe it is available from the WBStore. Mystic's on-line store has it for about eight bucks. The book has a step-by-step tutorial based on an oral history given by one of the last of the Herreshoff "mechanics" who built Columbia lifeboats at Herreshoff Mfg. Co. and complete plans and offsets. Buy the book and you have all you need to build the boat, rowing only version, or as a centerboarder.

http://www.mysticseaport.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=shop.museumProduct&storeNavigationID=34C05AA0-B0D0-D05E-1ABE5E6A04B46C37&productID=884BA3C9-D31F-4F12-A53842D1B6A3802F

http://www.mysticseaport.org/imagestore/shop_images/s1011276-r.jpg

[NYCKiwi]

Awesome, thanks!

[Rob Hazard]

OK, I see. Thanks, Bob.
When I read your post I thought we were still talking about Maid of Endor, so I was thinking of Herreshoff's method for big boat construction, where each frame was supported by a building form, which would allow quick assembly while insuring identical boats, but would require screw fastening from planks to frames.

Lapstrake dinghies is a different fish. I'll have to check out Barry Thomas's book again. It's been a while.

[George Ferguson]

I purchased the plans for Maid of Endor to study and learn about traditional boat building. However, I am curious if anyone else, who has studied the plans or attempted to loft the boat with the plans, feels that the plans are incomplete or at the very least leave a lot to be decided by the boat builder?

In my lofting efforts, I've discovered that the offsets, with the exception of the midship stations, don't come close to providing fair lines and that a lot of adjusting has to be done.

Although I am in a "study" phase about traditional boat construction, I am fairly certain that I would like to build this boat but I am frustrated at the plans.

Its a pretty boat, small enough to trailer, large enough for two people on a short cruise, and can be used for freshwater cruising and short ocean cruising.

Does anyone care to comment?

[James McMullen]

Are you lofting full-size? Are you lofting correctly? It is not too uncommon for points to be off an eighth of an inch or so when the tiny drawing offsets are expanded to 20 feet long. If you are off by as much as an inch or something like that, you'd better re-measure though. But the real answer is to get your full-size lofting fair and sweet and in perfect agreement between waterlines, buttocks, and diagonals before you pick off any sections. Yes, it is a lot of work.

[holzbt]

You will find that the Atkin plans assume you know a bit about boatbuilding. Many newer plans specifically for amatuers leave very little to guess at. When comparing the two the older plans seem rather incomplete. All the information needed to build the boat is contained in the Atkin plans but you will have to learn what was once considered common knowledge to fill in the gaps.

[George Ferguson]

Are you lofting full-size? Are you lofting correctly? It is not too uncommon for points to be off an eighth of an inch or so when the tiny drawing offsets are expanded to 20 feet long. If you are off by as much as an inch or something like that, you'd better re-measure though. But the real answer is to get your full-size lofting fair and sweet and in perfect agreement between waterlines, buttocks, and diagonals before you pick off any sections. Yes, it is a lot of work.

I am lofting in AutoCAD using splines. ...........What I've been doing since my original comment is to release a few of the control points in the body sections to fair the lines and now I am going back to the body plan to make sure my lines come out fair using the adjusted points.

I want to draw all of my details completely before I start lofting in the shop.

[Rational Root]

http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Articles/Maid/index.html

This may help

[Peacefuljourney]

I am lofting in AutoCAD using splines. ...........What I've been doing since my original comment is to release a few of the control points in the body sections to fair the lines and now I am going back to the body plan to make sure my lines come out fair using the adjusted points.

I want to draw all of my details completely before I start lofting in the shop.
That's interesting... I prefer my eyes then a computer... If you use a good batten thick enough for the line, it's gonna fair by itself, no need to all that work on CAD.

[Rick Nardone]

Having built a number of boats and having just launched an Atkin design (Dark Secret, built to his Valgerda design, http://ricksboatshop.blogspot.com ), I can tell you that it is highly likely that you will find an offset or two that is out of whack. This is true of pretty much any set of plans from an "old school" yacht designer. The tiresome, grueling process by which a table of offsets is generated by the designer is one that is prone to error. These errors usually become obvious when working on the loft floor, but can be hard to pick up when working at scale on the drafting table.

While I think that your time spent in AutoCAD will be of benefit in placement, arrangement, and dimensioning the various giblets that will be going into the boat, you will likely learn more about lofting in general, and this design in particular, by lofting the whole thing at 1/4 or 1/3 scale. The whole shebang will fit on a single piece of plywood. It's a large enough scale that you will see what is going on with the shape, and you can verify the accuracy of the offsets.

When I loft (and everybody does it his own way) I start with the sheer, rabbet, and overall profile, followed by the DWL. Next, I do a buttock line somewhere around halfway out from the rabbet. I then plot the 'midship section "ticking off" (Bud Macintosh covers this well in his book) dimensions from the long lines already laid down. by moving from long lines (buttocks and waterlines) to the body plan (sections) and ticking off the dimensions from the lofting, you become less and less reliant on the offset numbers as you go. You can always go back and measure any intersection to see if it is in agreement with the designer's data, but the final step in the process will verify your work.

After all of the waterlines, buttocks and sections are plotted and everything looks good, I plot the diagonals. These are probably the most important lines in the fairing process, especially for a round-bilged boat like Maid of Endor. Lay out the points out from the offsets, and lay the points out again from tick strips. They should be in pretty close agreement. Any obvious discrepency will point you to areas that need attention, but dont think for a second that the two sets of points will be an exact match.

I have worked with some builders who swear by using ONLY the digonals for the long lines. It doesn't seem like enough information to me, but it depends on the plans. L. Francic Herresoff only drew two digonals for Rozinante, but B. B. Crowninshield drew five for his Dark Harbor 17. Another important distinction to make about diagonals is that they generally intersect the sections at an angle much closer to square than buttocks and waterlines. This contributes to the ability to plot them more accurately both in a table of offsets and on the loft floor.

I am looking at the study plans for Maid of Endor. To illustrate the above point, look at the intersection of WL 1 and section 7. They cross at what we call a slash angle. When your pencil lines cross on the loft floor, there can be as much as 1/4 - 3/8" of area where they intersect but the exact point of crossing is difficult to define, even with a sharp pencil. Contrast that with the intersection of D2 and section 7 - much less of a slash angle, therefore much less potential error. These two points aren't very far apart in the boat, so the offset for the diagonal should take precedence over the offset for the waterline because it is "higher quality" data.

The important thing to remember is that when Mr. Atkin measured for the table of offsets he likely did so with a scale rule. This happened at, or very near, the end of the design process. I have not seen the full plans for Maid of Endor, but with 12 sections, 8 waterlines, 4 buttocks, 3 diagonals, and all of the other things to measure, I imagine that there are easily 120 data points. You can see the potential for error.

My sincere apologies for too much information.

Maid of Endor has long been on my short list of boats to build. Best of luck with yours. Happy Thanksgiving.

[tapsnap]

It occurs to me that there are a lot of people who are attracted to the "Maid Of Endor" design. Many people have even bought the plans, yet very few have built her. She's a boat that would attract those of us with little or moderate experience, if it were not for the fact that the plans were drawn for a well experienced boat builder. However, a highly experienced boat builder would probably not consider building such a small boat. By the time you've gained enough experience, my guess is that you will have set your sights on bigger and better designs. I think this is reason that she rarely gets built.
However, someone here, with a lot of boat building and boat drafting experience could make a fair amount of money selling a set of plans or book that fills in the blanks that Atkins' plans left out. It could and should be done without infringing copyright of course, but I think that there would be a lot of demand. What do you think?

[Sailor]

It's interesting that she's not built because she's small. I agree that it's most likely one reason why many choose not to build her when they realize that building her would not be all that different from building something a bit bigger say Peterson's Suzan, and you'd have a much larger vessel. I think you may be right in that by building her, documenting the build and producing build literature, instructions etc for the amateur builder you'd make alot of money. The funny part is that most beautiful classics are not build because they are too BIG!

[James McMullen]

It's not just that she's small, it's that she's also very complicated and expensive to build for her size compared to some of the modern alternatives to traditional construction. She's also sorta slow, pretty crowded, and essentially untrailerable except for in and out once a year.

She's also one of the prettiest small boat designs out there and I've actually considered building her myself just for that reason. Ahhhh, the heart is not always reasonable. But dammit! This is an absolute work of art for a boat, and I'd love to build one too. The building of her would be at least as much joy as the owning of her for me.

[Rick Nardone]

Her "small" size is exactly what keeps bringing me back to her. In my area any decent mooring field location has a ten-plus year waiting list for a spot. That makes a capable boat that will fit into a driveway/garage bay/shed a highly desirable thing. If she can be lugged around behind the family's full sized pick-up, then all the better.

Most of us (myself included) don't enjoy a lifestyle that allows us to take off and cruise for a month or two during the season. To have a nice stout "daysailer" that can have her accomodations stretched to house a couple for a long weekend, or maybe a week is a wonderful thing. Yes, she'll be much more difficult to set up, launch, rig, etc., than a purpose-built trailer sailer, but no other twenty foot boat will look or feel like she will.

One of the commentaries I read about this design (BDQ?) said that she makes for a heavy, slow, and overall inefficient (expensive) way to move two bunks and a cockpit around. I completely agree.

I also believe that, given most families infrastructure resources, she is a boat that makes sense in the long term. By being able to store in the back yard, driveway, or garage, one is afforded the opportunity to keep finishes, systems, and everything else just so. This will protect one's investment over time and help to ensure that, when the chance to cruise comes along, everything is sorted out, safe, and ready to go. Most of us who have boats on moorings will agree that we spend no small amount of time farting around before we can even head out for an after-work jaunt.

The places that are accessible to a boat like this can make short cruises potentially as interesting as longer trips in larger boats, and being able to go over the road without professional help, permits, and other hoo-hah means that you can head for those interesting cruising grounds at 50 knots, as opposed to 5.

As an example - my ten-day summer vacation would be 2+ days getting from Cape Ann to Mount Desert. At best, we would get 5 days of sailing before we have to turn around and head home. With Maid of Endor it would be 1/2 a day up, launch and rig that afternoon, eight days of poking into some really interesting spots, and then the return trip. Yes, there may be some expense incurred in the launch/step/rig process, but this would be more than offset by the reduced costs associated with owning a smaller sensible boat.

Very few wooden boats (boats in general?) make sense from a financial standpoint. If we balance the enjoyment extracted against the pain expended, then a 5,500 lb. 20' boat can earn her keep.

Build her as designed, keep her nice, use her well. I don't think she'd come up short.

[Ethan]

Having built a number of boats and having just launched an Atkin design (Dark Secret, built to his Valgerda design, http://ricksboatshop.blogspot.com ), I can tell you that it is highly likely that you will find an offset or two that is out of whack. This is true of pretty much any set of plans from an "old school" yacht designer. The tiresome, grueling process by which a table of offsets is generated by the designer is one that is prone to error. These errors usually become obvious when working on the loft floor, but can be hard to pick up when working at scale on the drafting table.

While I think that your time spent in AutoCAD will be of benefit in placement, arrangement, and dimensioning the various giblets that will be going into the boat, you will likely learn more about lofting in general, and this design in particular, by lofting the whole thing at 1/4 or 1/3 scale. The whole shebang will fit on a single piece of plywood. It's a large enough scale that you will see what is going on with the shape, and you can verify the accuracy of the offsets.

When I loft (and everybody does it his own way) I start with the sheer, rabbet, and overall profile, followed by the DWL. Next, I do a buttock line somewhere around halfway out from the rabbet. I then plot the 'midship section "ticking off" (Bud Macintosh covers this well in his book) dimensions from the long lines already laid down. by moving from long lines (buttocks and waterlines) to the body plan (sections) and ticking off the dimensions from the lofting, you become less and less reliant on the offset numbers as you go. You can always go back and measure any intersection to see if it is in agreement with the designer's data, but the final step in the process will verify your work.

After all of the waterlines, buttocks and sections are plotted and everything looks good, I plot the diagonals. These are probably the most important lines in the fairing process, especially for a round-bilged boat like Maid of Endor. Lay out the points out from the offsets, and lay the points out again from tick strips. They should be in pretty close agreement. Any obvious discrepency will point you to areas that need attention, but dont think for a second that the two sets of points will be an exact match.

I have worked with some builders who swear by using ONLY the digonals for the long lines. It doesn't seem like enough information to me, but it depends on the plans. L. Francic Herresoff only drew two digonals for Rozinante, but B. B. Crowninshield drew five for his Dark Harbor 17. Another important distinction to make about diagonals is that they generally intersect the sections at an angle much closer to square than buttocks and waterlines. This contributes to the ability to plot them more accurately both in a table of offsets and on the loft floor.

I am looking at the study plans for Maid of Endor. To illustrate the above point, look at the intersection of WL 1 and section 7. They cross at what we call a slash angle. When your pencil lines cross on the loft floor, there can be as much as 1/4 - 3/8" of area where they intersect but the exact point of crossing is difficult to define, even with a sharp pencil. Contrast that with the intersection of D2 and section 7 - much less of a slash angle, therefore much less potential error. These two points aren't very far apart in the boat, so the offset for the diagonal should take precedence over the offset for the waterline because it is "higher quality" data.

The important thing to remember is that when Mr. Atkin measured for the table of offsets he likely did so with a scale rule. This happened at, or very near, the end of the design process. I have not seen the full plans for Maid of Endor, but with 12 sections, 8 waterlines, 4 buttocks, 3 diagonals, and all of the other things to measure, I imagine that there are easily 120 data points. You can see the potential for error.

My sincere apologies for too much information.

Maid of Endor has long been on my short list of boats to build. Best of luck with yours. Happy Thanksgiving.

Excellent post, Rick. This post, along with Roger Long's very informative thread on stem/sheer development, are two of the better entries on the subject that I remember seeing in quite awhile.

I think lofting is one of those things that, due to its perceived mysticism, has been over addressed. Even the "bare bones" explanations out there veer off on esoteric tangents.

As for MoE, she's a salty looking thing, but I agree that if you're going to go to the time, trouble, and expense, you can get much more boat for relatively little additional $/lb. I also recognize that that option isn't an option for many, for a wide variety of reasons.

Having formed a strong interest in the Vertue, Bob's comment alluding to the Vertue being the logical evolution of a MoE effort leads me to wonder what the actual dollar difference would be. Mind you, I'm just curious. It's not an apples to apples comparison, but an interesting question nonetheless.

[submariner]

I am planning on building MoE. I've read every argument for and against her on this forum and the simple truth is that I've been in love with her lines for quite some time. This whole wooden boat business has a tinge of impracticality to it (with notable exceptions) but wooden boats are beautiful and romantic and so why not go all the way with it... Lofting begins in about a month when I get back from some extended time out of country. I lofted the boat at a scale of 1"= 1' (the plans are given in 5/8"=1') and did not discover the unfairness you mention. It will be interesting to see what happens when lofted full scale as errors will be much more obvious then. The plans are quite vague (and even contradict themselves on the issue of a plywood cabin top) but the biggest snag for my scale lofting was the fact that there are no offsets or information given for the curved transom except for its radius. (if I remember right- my set of plans is something like 6000 miles away) I was able to work it out- mostly by scaling- but on the actual boat I plan to set up the molds and determine the transom shape by fairing battens and using cheap plywood templates. Unless someone points out my error and the proper way to do that.

My point is that yes, it is vague, but also definitely doable. And there are many logical reasons not to build the Maid but if she has captured your heart like she has mine then think long and hard on it and then brush off the sound advice against you and build! The building process will be great and then the moment you see her on her lines you will be glad you didn't buy that practical used fiberglass boat for the price of your keel timber... or will you.. I know I will!

[James McMullen]

Having the prettiest boat in any cove you should sail to is well worth any sort of trouble. I salute your determination to build her, submariner! You will have the sort of satisfaction not sold in any store!

Like I said, I'd still like to build one too. . .and I've got a perfectly good Stone Horse that fills the exact same sort of role already bought and paid for. But that Maid is prettier indeed. . . . .

[Rick Nardone]

...and did not discover the unfairness you mention...

I don't mean to imply that the lines are unfair. The point I am trying to make is that if the offsets disagree with the plotting of a fair line, then the fair line should take precedence. Valgerda's plans showed a handful of "errors" that were easily reconciled when she was drawn full size. These errors do not indicate any shortcoming in the designer's abilities or techniques. They are clerical errors.


...you can get much more boat for relatively little additional $/lb...

For the most part, the price per pound of boat is pretty equal from boat to boat when building in wood. Obvious exceptions are when building either very light or very heavy vessels. A parallel to this is pricing a custom-built home. A contractor may spout off a quote like "$110/sq. ft." We all know that a kitchen costs more than a hallway to build out, but the average will still hold for the entire project.

Going back to boat building - milling, fitting, and rabbetting the backbone timbers involves a handful of large and heavy parts. This part of the job will come in "cheaper" per pound than building the galley joinery, especially if you are paying for labor, but the whole job will average out to what you will find to be a fairly consistent rate.

When considering pricing a boat project, I usually start at about $20/lb., including labor. Many factors contribute to bumping this number up or down - finish, complexity, and choice of materials all have their effects.


. . .and I've got a perfectly good Stone Horse that fills the exact same sort of role already bought and paid for. But that Maid is prettier indeed. . .

I, too, have a "perfectly good" boat made of that other stuff that serves us very well for our limited cruising abilities. She is a 33' Rhodes Swiftsure that is currently being re-powered (lots of other stuff being done, but that's first and foremost on the list this winter) in my "spare time"

http://gastodieselrepower.blogspot.com/

She's a great boat, and I don't plan to part with her any time soon, but if anything ever happened to her I would have Maid of Endor right up there on the list for her replacement.

Then again, it would probably be less work (and $$$) to build MoE than it will be to undo and re-do everything on Strider's list...

[tapsnap]

So is anybody actually building this beauty right now or are we all just dreaming about her. If someone is quietly working on her, post some pictures for heaven sake!

[George Ferguson]

Its exciting to see the discussion about Maid of Endor on here! While I've been working too much and not doing my proper homework on boatbuilding, I've decided that I am going to build MOE for sure.

One of the reasons I've been using AutoCAD to loft in is because its easier to manipulate than physical drawing on a floor and I can later put together small detail drawings. I am also learning about boatbuilding and drawing over and over is a great way to get a more intimate understanding of how a boat comes together. Although, I agree that lofting full size drawings on the floor will let the eye pick up a more fair curve. But even on a computer screen I can clearly see unfair lines generated in the body sections when I use all the water lines, buttocks, and body lines per the plan's offsets to create the body sections.

My plan is to get the lines perfected to the point where I can cut all the backbone and frame pieces per the drawings and they'll fit together perfectly like a puzzle. Also, I plan to laminate my frames and beams, use steel floors, and put them all together then fasten them to the backbone pieces. Any comments on that idea?

[John N]

What you are describing is I think called a bottoms up approach and boat building is usually a top down one. The overall shape or lines of the structure is paramount. How you got there is secondary. For example, if I cut out and clamp together a section of the backbone, my joints may be perfect but if when I raise it into position it doesn't line up with the rest of the structure I have to take it apart and re-cut my joints until it does.
Any tiny error in your computer lofting will be grossly magnified. If two joints are out by even 1/32" and the pieces are long enough you will have a noticeable error in the whole structure. If it was a computer doing the cutting and assembling then it could in theory work out. But the human element doing the cutting and fitting is prone to error and the only way around this is to keep changing your focus from the detailed view to the an overall one. Going constantly back and forth between the two is how, I think, most boats are built.
just my $00.02 can.
John

[George Ferguson]

I've been reading Greg Rossel's book, Building Small Boats, this weekend and there is excellent advice on how to work out the errors in the table of offsets for MOE. When the table of offsets has conflicting dimensions for buttocks and waterlines he recommends relying on waterlines when near the sheer and buttocks when near the keel. That seems to be working out for me in laying down the lines in AutoCAD. I plan to redraw the waterlines and buttocks in the half breadth plan and profile plan to make sure the lines come out fair there also. After it all looks looks good in AutoCAD I'll plot it out to 6" = 1' scale and see how fair the lines actually look on paper then I'll lay them down on the floor at full size.

Submariner..............Greg's book also provides very good information on how to accurately project the lines for the transom to the correct proportions.

Does anyone have any recommendations for specs? I plan on using white oak for the backbone, frames, beams, sheer planks, and any wood members that will get a lot of abuse. Any members that will be stained will also be out of white oak. I plan on using the member dimensions that Mr. Atkin specifies but I plan on laminating the frames and beams. The decking and planking will be of clear Douglas Fir unless I convince myself in the meantime to use yellow pine which is more plentiful in this market area. I prefer the structural qualities of the yellow pine but like the look of DF. The deck will be strip-built with waterproof-glued seams with a v-groove facing into the cabin. I also plan to change up the coaming a little and make the cabin trunk and cockpit coaming one continuous member. From what I've been looking at so far, I like this look better. Any advice on what to paint and what to stain?

Thanks for the continued conversation about the construction of MOE. This is great support for a novice like myself who wants to build a complicated boat like this.

[submariner]

Thanks for the tip- I'll give that section a re-read. Just for comparison's sake I also plan to use white oak for backbone, frames and sheer plank. I am playing with the idea of using it for the garboard as well. I also plan to use DF for planking and decking, but I may do the topsides with red cedar just cause I'm not sure I have enough high quality DF to do the whole hull and deck. The cedar will also keep the weight topsides lower and offer higher rot resistance. These woods were chosen largely because I already have the fir flitches, the oak is standing in my neighbors yard, and the cedar is easy to come by in the pacific northwest. I'm located near Portland, Oregon. Where are you George?

If you haven't already read here and elsewhere- know that white oak does not glue well. I believe resorsinol can successfully glue it, but the consensus seems to be that epoxy can not. But the resorcinol (if im spelling that right) requires high temperatures, close fits and high clamp pressures so that may affect your decision to use it.

This could turn out to be a very interesting thing we are starting here- two new Maids coming together at roughly the same time with different build philosophies (laminated vs. solid etc..) Should be fun. My rough calculations are that this boat will take about 2500 hours to build. We'll see how that shapes up.

- Jonathan

[George Ferguson]

I live in Richardson, TX.

The lumber for my boat is still blowing in the wind over in East Texas and up in your neck of the woods.

I'm not sure how long it will take me to build MOE but probably a long time since I don't have a lot of time to work on it.

I have been worrying about the use of any glues in my boat and actually I am still not fully convinced to use laminated products. Hopefully I am able to locate a proven adhesive for laminating white oak.

How's the lofting going?

Keep in touch!

[Peacefuljourney]

Hopefully I am able to locate a proven adhesive for laminating white oak.

Resorcinol is good for white oak, a good sanding with 40 grits before gluing help. Larry Pardey laminated with white oak them stem of seraffyn, 30 years later it was proved solid & sound in a survey.

[submariner]

Well I have actually been in Istanbul for the last five months. I get back home in about a month and full size lofting will begin then. I also plan to take quite some time with this build as it will be a learning process at every step and I do have full-time life going on as well. I'm sure that between the two of us and all the help of this forum we can get our specific questions answered when they come up. The resorcinol seems like good stuff and I may use it to laminate floors in the way of the ballast as Peacefuljourney is doing on his Gartside cutter. At any rate those floors dont need to be installed until after planking and roll over so I have time to think on it.

Speaking of roll over I have decided to build upside down. I have weighed every angle of the debate that I can think of. After reading How to Build Wooden Boats by Bud McIntosh (a must read if you haven't) I was convinced that building upright was the only way to go. but then I saw the building Cockle thread and really began to see how upside down building could be adapted for MOE. The final push for upside down came because the plans show a frame bent over every mold with two in between each mold pair. building upside-down with stringers over the molds and then frams bent over the stringers will allow me to have a frame over a mold and still through fasten (rivet) the planking. I wont be able to make off the rivets on every third frame until the molds come out but at least I will be able to have the nail in place. I considered building upright in the normal way with frames bent into ribbands from the inside but I would have had to offset the frames some and sticking as close to the plans as possible seemed best. I do NOT think that upside-down is the only way to do it- it is just is the way I am leaning. Disadvantages include difficulty proving the sheer line and not being able to attach the ballast until late in the game.

I'd be interested in hearing other peoples insight. For those who dont have the plans here is some useful information for the debate off the top of my head:
Frames are steam bent, square cross-section, oak located at each station and intermediate.
Frames are sunk into the keel in sockets
Planking is to be through fastened with copper rivets
There is deadwood scarfed to the ballast that fits under the full length keel (I think this deadwood would have to be fit after roll over- not ideal but doable.)

Thanks all.

[James McMullen]

I have been worrying about the use of any glues in my boat and actually I am still not fully convinced to use laminated products. Hopefully I am able to locate a proven adhesive for laminating white oak.



As someone who makes his living from restoring and repairing old wooden boats, I will tell you that the most proven and consistent way to use white oak in a boat is not to try to glue it with anything, but rather to shape it in the time-honored and tested ways of either steam-bending or sawing and then carefully through-fastening with the proper bedding. White oak that has been glued in any area that moisture cycles is always suspect. It's one of the first places to need scrutiny when we find it in the midst of a repair, a re-planking, a re-fastening. There are a bazillion other woods out there that do glue well, so you should save yourself the grief and use any one of those instead of white oak if you intend to make laminated structures. If you do plan to use the most excellent and useful species Quercus alba in your boatbuilding adventures, you really ought to use it in the way that has been proven to be trouble-free.

Horses for courses, my friends. Why borrow trouble? Traditional carvel boatbuilding is tricksy enough even when you do use the right woods in the right ways.

[George Ferguson]

As someone who makes his living from restoring and repairing old wooden boats, I will tell you that the most proven and consistent way to use white oak in a boat is not to try to glue it with anything, but rather to shape it in the time-honored and tested ways of either steam-bending or sawing and then carefully through-fastening with the proper bedding. White oak that has been glued in any area that moisture cycles is always suspect. It's one of the first places to need scrutiny when we find it in the midst of a repair, a re-planking, a re-fastening. There are a bazillion other woods out there that do glue well, so you should save yourself the grief and use any one of those instead of white oak if you intend to make laminated structures. If you do plan to use the most excellent and useful species Quercus alba in your boatbuilding adventures, you really ought to use it in the way that has been proven to be trouble-free.

Horses for courses, my friends. Why borrow trouble? Traditional carvel boatbuilding is tricksy enough even when you do use the right woods in the right ways.


Thank you for the advice. I do think I will skip the glue now. What's your opinion of a strip built deck edge nailed and glued?

What do you think about my idea to fasten my frames, beams, and floors around the edge of the mold and then cut the bevel on the frame on a bandsaw? Too labor intensive?

[JohnPeer]

So is anybody actually building this beauty right now or are we all just dreaming about her. If someone is quietly working on her, post some pictures for heaven sake!


Sure...

http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?14573-maid-of-endor&p=2897543#post2897543

[S B]

Which side up depends on how you work. I have never built one upside down myself,helped others but that doesn't count. If you build "traditional carvel" right side up, the fitting of knees,floors,stringers,bulkheads etc., is a breeze,without the plank on. The only difficulty comes with the below water plank, as the topsides is roughly the same either way. Planking upside down makes easy work(fixed a few),but cutting pieces for inside may try your patience,does mine and I know how to do it.