Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 123 ... LastLast
Results 36 to 70 of 111

Thread: Design Challenge III

  1. #36
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    8

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    Greetings from the Mediterranean Sea (Balearic Islands, Spain).

    I'm a young industrial designer and amateur nautical designer and builder. I am very happy and excited about this new challenge, the ship described in the rules closely resembles the ship that I want to design and build for myself and to sell in kit form.

    To be honest, I will not reach the maximum parameters of the challenge. I will always think of my needs and my potential clients. For me the maximum length of 40 'and weight of 3,500 lbs are simple delimiters.

    The most important thing for my design is:

    That is really a good performance boat under sail and row. The rowing is not intended as an auxiliary propulsion, the ship must perform well with two paddlers and allow a comfortable position for rowing.

    Must be affordable for car trailers (1600 lbs max in Europe) and are easily launched and rigged with only one person.

    Allow a comfortable accommodation for two people and multy-day cruising.

    Here in Mallorca, we don't have quiet lakes or bays so you can meet with a storm of 34-47 knots that comes without warning. If indeed my boat should be perfectly able to navigate in poor sea and wind conditions.

    And all that combining the best of traditional wood construction and modern design.

    I hope to get a good ending

  2. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Oriental, NC USA
    Posts
    3,766

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    Antoniv, A good attitude and I agree with your parameters.
    Tom L

  3. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Finland, Lieksa - lat 63 N, lon 30 E
    Posts
    179

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    Smelling like those fast Ladoga boats / Dutch "snick" to me. To modern standards of course. The original boats were open. Either rigged to one mast, gaff sail and jib (snick) or two masts and spritsails (Ladoga "saima"). Especially good in windward. Both have a similar, characteristic stem (and stern) - and a few things under the waterline in common.

    For spartan accomodation there could be enough of foredeck to sleep under, room under the aft deck for other vital needs. Water ballast midships under the main deck level right above waterline - hence sturdy bulkheads fore and aft of course. Auxiliary propulsion: rowing.
    Clincker built. I have the feeling a 9-10 m long all wooden boat wouldn't be too heavy to meet the standards.

    Too bad I'm not a boat designer
    ~ God bless and protect all sailors and please let them guys make boats longer than I have my skis amen ~

  4. #39

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    Hmm, I already know what can work for this contest, and later can become good stock design for amateur builders and small yards.

  5. #40
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    8

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    @Tom Tank's for your comentary and I also agree with your words.

    The history and natural selection show us what are the best ways to face the sea and use.

    I show a LlaŁt, the classic boat of the Mediterranean designed and evolved for a great performance in rowing and sailing (from when the engines did not exist) your sail area are very divided, with very low sail center to accommodate all possible wind situations.

    http://www.vistaalmar.es/hablame-del...Imagen0064.jpg

    Now the next step is to define the minimum and maximum dimensions of design.

    One factor that defines the maximum dimension is that the ship should move correctly with the strength of only two rowers. In addition, this factor also defines a maximum beam and drawing a narrow and sharp boat forms.

    The factor that defines the minimum size is to accommodate two people in your cabin.

    I believe that a length between 6-7 meters (22-23 ft) would be a good starting point.

  6. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Lexington, MA
    Posts
    728

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    Years ago I saw a two-person ocean-going plywood kayak about 22 feet long that resembled a submarine. In cross section it was oval (about 3 1/2 feet high and perhaps 4 feet wide). Its owners, a sturdy couple, spent most of their time miles offshore "paddling among the whales." They lived aboard in their cockpits and double bunk, and had a generous galley and storage. When I saw them, they had pulled their boat up to a cabin for an overnight with shower, using a two-wheeled dolly. They were eating mahi mahi they had caught. There was some water ballast, and they had weathered some very nasty storms. I didn't see a mast or sail, but balanced sails and a leeboard could obviously be added.

    I thought that this was a very appealing boat, and bet that a clever new design along these lines would indeed be marketable.

  7. #42
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Waterbury, Connecticut
    Posts
    1,876

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    [QUOTE=spirit;2715168]Years ago I saw a two-person ocean-going plywood kayak about 22 feet long that resembled a submarine. In cross section it was oval (about 3 1/2 feet high and perhaps 4 feet wide). Its owners, a sturdy couple, spent most of their time miles offshore "paddling among the whales." They lived aboard in their cockpits and double bunk.../QUOTE]

    --- That sounds so good! Sigh... -- Wade

  8. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Shore, Massachusetts
    Posts
    5,502

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    I do not see the weight limit as any sort of difficulty for a mono hull design. It seems pretty obvious that the designs will not be keel boats but boats that develop the majority of their sail carrying power from their form stability. The 3,000 lb weight limit is easily within the weight of any performance 30 footer and could accomodate a 40' monohull with little or no effort... I think the multi hulls wil have to be nearly as weight conscious as the monos.


    Quote Originally Posted by spirit View Post
    Years ago I saw a two-person ocean-going plywood kayak about 22 feet long that resembled a submarine. In cross section it was oval (about 3 1/2 feet high and perhaps 4 feet wide). Its owners, a sturdy couple, spent most of their time miles offshore "paddling among the whales." They lived aboard in their cockpits and double bunk, and had a generous galley and storage. When I saw them, they had pulled their boat up to a cabin for an overnight with shower, using a two-wheeled dolly. They were eating mahi mahi they had caught. There was some water ballast, and they had weathered some very nasty storms. I didn't see a mast or sail, but balanced sails and a leeboard could obviously be added.

    I thought that this was a very appealing boat, and bet that a clever new design along these lines would indeed be marketable.
    I'm trying to envision how you paddle a kayak thats 4' wide and 3' high, long paddles, I suppose these royal barges/ dragon boat types in the far east are close to these proportions but they have 50+ paddlers and they just paddle on one side... also I have never seen a Kayak with double bunks or a galley, never mind both!
    sounds like some aux. sail power could come in very handy on a kayak of these proportions, make it an interesting expedition boat.

  9. #44
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Waterbury, Connecticut
    Posts
    1,876

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    Quote Originally Posted by Daniel Noyes View Post
    ... I'm trying to envision how you paddle a kayak thats 4' wide and 3' high, long paddles, ...
    --- I was thinking they paddled it like a canoe, from fore and aft cockpits near enough to the ends to enable a canoe-paddle stroke, though perhaps depending on the end-shapes, a kayak paddle might work? If the center sleeping-cabin used a narrow cut-out down the center, fabric-covered for weather, as in some of the Birdwatcher-like designs, then crew could travel along the center without crawling over the cabin-top? -- Wade

  10. #45
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    8

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    I'm still working on the preliminary studies to my design proposal.

    The maximum dimensions of the boat that I want to design are bounded to the maximum load weight of light-trailers in Spain: aprox 500 kg (1100 lb). And the maximum width of the load on the trailer of 2.40 m (+- 8ft)

    For this my design can not exceed 6 meters (20ft) .

    Now I wonder, what conditions are the minimum for a comfortable accommodation for two crews on a weekend costal cruise ?

  11. #46
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    St. Mary's County, MD
    Posts
    884

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    This is somewhat reminiscent of the 1982 Cruising World magazine design competition, which was for a trailerable cruiser, but the maximum weight there was 1000 pounds, for easy trailerability behind small fuel efficient cars. The top three designs were two 22-23 feet monohulls and Wharram's Tiki 21 catamaran, as I recall. Of course, there was no requirement for sailing to windward in a gale. But the winners were all realistically practical trailer boats.

    Bob

  12. #47
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    7,405

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    Now I wonder, what conditions are the minimum for a comfortable accommodation for two crews on a weekend costal cruise ?
    That depends entirely, of course, on who the crew are. A double kayak will be fine for some; others need beds with mattresses, a head with a shower and a galley with a fridge and stove. (That might be close to me and SWMBO).

    But if the contest or use of the boat assumes sleeping on board, I've wondered why you don't see small trimarans with tents that cover the entire boat -- turning the tramps between the akas into big berths. It could work just like those pop-up campers do. A small cuddy forward could contain the head and some dry stowage space, but the boat would not have to be really big or complicated. A variation on the Tremolino or Jaganda, for example.

  13. #48
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    St. Mary's County, MD
    Posts
    884

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    Quote Originally Posted by Woxbox View Post
    But if the contest or use of the boat assumes sleeping on board, I've wondered why you don't see small trimarans with tents that cover the entire boat -- turning the tramps between the akas into big berths. It could work just like those pop-up campers do. A small cuddy forward could contain the head and some dry stowage space, but the boat would not have to be really big or complicated.
    There was a small trimaran somewhat like that produced back around 1980 or so. It was called the Tramp, about 20 feet. I think it was a Farrier design. But it had essentially a big cockpit that could be tented in for camp cruising.

    Bob

  14. #49
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    7,405

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    Bob -- There are still a few Tramps around. It's actually 19 feet and was indeed produced by Farrier/Corsair. That might be an ideal platform for what I've been thinking of --you make up a big tent that uses the tramps for sleeping space and leaves the cockpit open. The tent would probably have a floor sewn in where it extends out over the tramps so that stuff couldn't be lost overboard and to keep out the drafts. That boat folds up real quickly like the other Farrier tris.


  15. #50
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    SV Sula, East Loch Tarbert, Scotland
    Posts
    258

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    I'm no boat designer, but has anyone considered a 20ft traditional long keel hull based on scottish herring lugger with sand/gravel/stone ballast that could be found on the beach after trailing and dumped for rowing, beaching and trailering. Before engines many traditional herring luggers were rowed. it would enable light trailering and good rough weather performace.


    A Clyde skiff in c. 1904 using oars and sails. Source: Martin, A (2002). Herring fishermen of Kintyre and Ayrshire. House of Lochar, Isle of Colonsay, UK14

  16. #51
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    8

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    In my opinion, the accommodation needs for a coastal boat crossings are not limited simply to sleep in a tent when the ship is stopped.

    Is important for me, a space inside while you are sailing, also in the contest rules require a port-poti, so it must be a minimum cabin with headroom to sit.

    You think that 4ft is the minimum correct measurement?

    This does not eliminate the need for a tent or awning on deck for camping, cooking and resting.

  17. #52
    Join Date
    Apr 1999
    Location
    West Boothbay Harbor, Maine
    Posts
    22,488

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    Quote Originally Posted by robert666 View Post
    I'm no boat designer, but has anyone considered a 20ft traditional long keel hull based on scottish herring lugger with sand/gravel/stone ballast that could be found on the beach after trailing and dumped for rowing, beaching and trailering. ]
    The amount of removable ballast to get such a boat down to good lines (before boating a load of fish) could be as much as 750-1000 pounds. That's a lot of weight to find, load and unload, if you can find it at all and can just dig up/carry it away/dump it, which would be largely an unpopular move around here.
    "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so."

    -Mark Twain

  18. #53
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Padanaram, MA USA
    Posts
    9,106

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    I'm thinking of a new business opportunity-
    A stand at launching ramps offer ice, beverages, hot dogs and ballast stone rental.

  19. #54
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    320

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    For a proa that fits the bill give or take an inch, HarryProa maxi trailersailer:

    http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/YG2pTJw...erspective.jpg

    I think the answer to a fair number of the questions so far in this thread, is Muffallo which is the boat they chose to illustrate the design competition rules with. This is actually the plastic version of the Kurt Hughes tri that I built, and much nicer looking it is with all it's curves. But obviously as an existing design, it captures their sense of what could be. It goes to windward like any tri, it is very slow to de-trailer, not a folder for instnace, but certainly can take to the road. the boat is mostly known from it's youtube video, which shows a crane being used to launch it. So the actual individual capabilities are not extraordinary, it's the synthesis that musr have recomended it.
    Last edited by Tomcat; 10-04-2010 at 01:27 AM.

  20. #55

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    Although Wooden Boat has been selling my Pixie and Quattro 16 catamaran plans for 20 years I have only just joined the WB forum and this is my first post.

    Like many of you, I have been concerned about the last requirement in the competition. I wrote to Carl about it a couple of weeks ago but have not yet had a reply.

    This is an edited version of what I wrote:

    "I know I didn't win your last competition (I entered a 24ft powercat, see the ecocat thread), but that won't stop me from trying again.

    However I have a problem with your list of requirements. Specifically the last one ie "And, finally, the boat must have good seakeeping attributes with the ability to sail to windward in a gale (34-47 knots)."

    That means over 50 knots apparent if the boat is to make any forward way. You know that neither of the two boats used to illustrate your competition can sail safely and effectively to windward in those conditions, even in flat water, never mind at sea.

    Even 60 ft non-stop-round-the-world race boats have problems, see a recent XSRacing report ""We took a beating with 45-50 knots of wind and strong seas," Van Liew reported via satellite email", while of course the America's Cup races are not started in that wind, nor are any dinghy regattas. I suspect that no Raid event will start if a true gale is forecast, the liability problems for organisers would be huge.

    I am sure that others have commented on this as well, so could you please clarify what you mean. ie is the competition for a genuine "to windward in 50 knots" boat, or for a "can survive 30 knots if desperate and caught out" boat. I suspect the latter, but I'd like confirmation before drawing anything."

    Now obviously WB can set whatever rules they like, but as some of you have pointed out, drawing a new boat is a major undertaking and if it is drawn only for this competition then designers need to feel they COULD win. And thus they have to be very sure that their entry is not going to be rejected because it doesn't meet all the terms of the competition. And as I say, neither of the two boats illustrating the competition announcement do. Nor would a boat like a Macgregor 26 (for example) even though it could easily meet the other requirements.

    All the requirements have equal billing, so if one can ignore the last one, why not the 40ft length, or the 3500lb max displacement? Where does it end??

    In fact I can't think any boat of this type which can be considered to be DESIGNED to sail to windward in 50 knots (which, remember, is what the rules require) unless it is a pretty awful/uncomfortable/slow boat the rest of the time. Flush decked? Massive spars yet small sail area?? no cockpit? etc. 50 knots is a serious wind, especially when bashing to windward into it.

    Over 20 years ago I sailed a 24ft Strider catamaran singlehanded from Plymouth, UK to the USSR (in fact three of us did the trip sailing in convoy). We daysailed the whole way there and back over a three month period and enjoyed seven countries enroute (the ultimate raid perhaps?). While in the USSR we met an owner of a 45ft monohull, also from Plymouth, who said "I got here in 5 days, my boat goes really well to windward in a gale" But his boat was an awful design for the gentle sailing conditions that most people actually want to sail in. We pitied him. He missed out so much.

    Bottom line is: I'd like to enter this competition, but I won't and to be honest cannot advise anyone else to until this requirement is clarified.

    Richard Woods of Woods Designs

    www.sailingcatamarans.com

  21. #56
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    San Pedro, CA
    Posts
    737

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    Whew! That's a bracing rush for a first post here. I'm kinda wondering, though, if thumping on the boss is such a good call.

    Carl is a very reasonable, but busy, guy and would have no-doubt gotten around to a solid answer once all the hoopla with IBEX was concluded on September 30. It might also be prudent to consider that perhaps Carl took a bit of a well-earned vacation after such an intense stretch?

    Welcome to the Forum


    PS: Richard, you have a Private Message
    Last edited by Chris Ostlind; 10-07-2010 at 02:31 PM.

  22. #57
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Southern NH
    Posts
    1,332

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    Perhaps the intent is not a boat on which one would want to go to windward in a gale, but one that, well handled, could keep off a lee shore if caught out in a gale and make its way to safety.

    We are supposed to be having fun, aren't we?

  23. #58

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    I have to agree with Richard, and I think I've said it before, that the "get to windward in a gale" requirement is a very odd one. I say that not just because it doesn't seem to fit with a raid-type design, but also because of its very nebulous nature. How can you accurately predict which boats will go to windward in what are fairly extreme conditions? What it comes down to is the opinion of the judges, which of course is the point of the exercise, but different judges will have very different opinions on what sort of boat can pass this test.

  24. #59
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Southern Maine
    Posts
    19,164

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    I think Carl has a case of "what if my boat were a bit bigger", take a 210, stretch it to about 37 feet, put a small lid on it and make the cockpit self draining and you'd have a boat that would be underballasted, but could meet the requirements. Welcome aboard Richard, I've admired your cats for years.

  25. #60
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    San Pedro, CA
    Posts
    737

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    To me, it's really simple; this argument about a boat going to windward in whatever wind speed. This is a contest for design submissions. The rules have been put forth and now we have whining about the rules. You get to decide if you're going to submit under these rules, or you can pass. It's not your contest, not your magazine and you don't get to set parameters. It's just like this Forum, so graciously supplied by the publisher of Wooden Boat... Abide by the rules, or take a hike.

    You guys who are whining right now, have a big ol' dilemma in front of you as I see it. Either get it together and take your best shot, or walk away and look for something within your grasp at a later date. Chuffing on the publisher is not going to get you to the promised land. You guys act like Carl and his staff have no idea at all what is going on with boats. Take one look at the publications and additional activities within the family to which Wooden Boat Magazine belongs. It may just give you pause.

  26. #61
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Shore, Massachusetts
    Posts
    5,502

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    In reference to the "to windward in a gale" requirement

    Quote Originally Posted by Daniel Noyes View Post
    I think this is simply a criteria to weed out freekish boats with ridiculous cabins and exceptionally high topside... basically the boat must be a real sail boat, not a floating house or party barge with a sail.
    Guys this was post #33, three weeks ago...

    the to windward in a gale is simply to introduce a hint of seaworthy/ sea keeping ability and eliminate extreme machines in either the racing direction (as in an over canvased boat that has no means of reefing or shortening sail effectively) or the house boat direction (big picture windows and lots of boxy superstructure)

    certainly will not keep me from entering, these requirements are taylor made for my ideal racer/cruiser dory designs.

    nuff said

  27. #62
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    7,405

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    So Chris, sounds like you have a design in the works.

  28. #63
    Join Date
    Apr 1999
    Location
    West Boothbay Harbor, Maine
    Posts
    22,488

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    Quote Originally Posted by Hwyl View Post
    I think Carl has a case of "what if my boat were a bit bigger", take a 210, stretch it to about 37 feet, put a small lid on it and make the cockpit self draining and you'd have a boat that would be underballasted, but could meet the requirements.
    That design could be 'Nantucket Splinter' by Bruce King at 38'.
    "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so."

    -Mark Twain

  29. #64
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brooklin, Maine
    Posts
    1,487

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    Hi, Richard. I'm sorry I overlooked your email. Things have been just a bit frantic....

    Great thread: You don't need my clarification(s) at all.

    And very funny about the Nantucket Splinter.

  30. #65
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    3,102

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Ostlind View Post
    To me, it's really simple; this argument about a boat going to windward in whatever wind speed. This is a contest for design submissions. The rules have been put forth and now we have whining about the rules.
    It's not whining. The boats Carl used to illustrate the possibilities are NOT capable of meeting this requirement. And one experienced designer (Richard Woods) doubts that ANY boat could meet both this requirement and all the others.

    Someone who designs boats as essentially a "hobby" can certainly have at it without worrying about the issue. Someone who does it for a living has to be more protective of their time. It's perfectly legitimate to question this requirement. If the stated rules aren't both clear and achievable, what's the point of entering the contest? And, as Richard suggests, if WB will ultimately let designers fudge on this point, why have rules for the contest at all? The whole thing becomes arbitrary, and not worth the time of talented designers who are busy with other work.

  31. #66
    Join Date
    Apr 1999
    Location
    West Boothbay Harbor, Maine
    Posts
    22,488

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    A boat that COULD meet all those paramaters would be something to see and sail!! I hope something comes out of the comp that approaches that.
    "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so."

    -Mark Twain

  32. #67
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Cummington
    Posts
    5,195

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    Lofting Theresa II and knowing the other Albert Strange midsize yawl designs, I think I should enter one for him.

  33. #68

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    I have to say that probably WB means what it says, and the requirement to sail to windward in a gale is not just a way to eliminate freakish boats.

    Are there any trailerable boats in existence now that meet the requirement, under 3500 lbs.? I can't think of any, offhand-- maybe the F-32? Maybe WB is trying to scare a previously unknown kind of boat out of the woodwork.

    The only possibility that occurs to me is a large folding multihull, but what a nightmare to trail. And to engineer.

  34. #69
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    7,405

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    I have a hunch the F-27 could pull it off. I used to have a Brown Searunner 25, but never had it out in 50-knot winds. But it would sail to windward in 35, and I beleive the F-27 is more capable in such conditions. It does meet the weight requirement -- they run 2,700 pounds empty.

    superfox.jpg

  35. #70
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    San Pedro, CA
    Posts
    737

    Default Re: Design Challenge III

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Paskey View Post
    It's not whining. The boats Carl used to illustrate the possibilities are NOT capable of meeting this requirement. And one experienced designer (Richard Woods) doubts that ANY boat could meet both this requirement and all the others.
    Whining, complaining, pitching a hissy fit. It's all the same thing. As for Carl's illustrative examples... does everything in this world have to be so literal in order to set a tone? What if the images were chosen to specifically twist your head just a bit, so that you’d maybe get rolling on some outside the box solutions? There are marching orders in place and one has their imagination, combined with technical knowledge and talent. If one is pushed away by the task, then step aside. Simple.

    It's interesting that the Detroit auto makers of a few years ago, whined their butts off when California instituted strict emission controls. Not wanting to miss-out on the huge market, they got their act together and produced vehicles that could meet the rules. Same thing happened when strong mileage requirements were put into place. More whining and ultimately, the cars that the authorities said could never be done, appeared in showrooms and flew out the door.

    Remarkable stuff, eh?

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Paskey View Post

    Someone who designs boats as essentially a "hobby" can certainly have at it without worrying about the issue. Someone who does it for a living has to be more protective of their time. It's perfectly legitimate to question this requirement. If the stated rules aren't both clear and achievable, what's the point of entering the contest? And, as Richard suggests, if WB will ultimately let designers fudge on this point, why have rules for the contest at all? The whole thing becomes arbitrary, and not worth the time of talented designers who are busy with other work.
    Last time I checked, Steve, working pros had an equal chance at utilizing their creative potential as any guy who does design work for a hobby. By having this contest open to working professionals, doesn't that put amateur designers behind a very big 8-Ball, already? Yet, I don't seem to sense that any amateurs were feeling like they had to hide in the bushes for any of the previous Challenges. After all, the amateurs that I know also have regular jobs and have to work on something like this in their spare time... just like a pro would if he were interested.

    I suggest that it's not legit to question any of the requirements as they have been presented. Simply assess the value based on one's criteria and skills and either get into it, or leave it alone. Telling Wooden Boat that their contest is bunk is tantamount to someone walking by a neighbor's house and suggesting the owner get off his butt and paint the thing another color.

    It's none of our business how they (WB) want to configure their Challenge. If, after gathering together your energy and penciling every thoughtful solution you can muster to the challenge, you still feel that the rules are too restrictive, then my experience suggests that working from within a typical organization is the best way to effect change and not chomping at it from outside the walls. Let’s just say that one's wife, or girlfriend, has very specific rules about washing one’s hands before sitting down for a meal. Does anyone here really believe that whining about that rule is going to get any traction… at all?

    It looks like Carl has apologized to Richard for the tardy response. He also addressed the point as to a need for clarification.

    With the depth of knowledge of the boating industry that these guys at WB and its connected businesses have, one may wish to consider that the rules were specifically created to push the thinking curve and see what might come forth. And who really wants to suggest that WB is fudging on their own rules at this point when the submission date hasn't gone flying by? Rather presumptive, if you ask me and sure to win hearts and minds.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •