Question about Reuel Parker's Pilot Schooner Designs

[philosophisticat]

I am wrestling with purchasing plans for Parker's 37' Pilot Schooner. See here: http://www.parker-marine.com/pilo37page.html . I admire his cold molded construction techniques and am intrigued by many of his designs. But I wonder about the Pilot Schooner 37 (and his Pilot Schooner 45, too, for that matter): their broad bow and narrower stern remind me of a cod-headed mackerel-tailed boat -- not something i am interested in. His PS 37 is modeled after a "Baltimore clipper" or a 19th century Virginia pilot schooner.

I believe that a couple of the PS 45s have been built, but don't believe there have been any PS 37s.

Does anyone have thoughts about these hull shapes?

[skaraborgcraft]

I am wrestling with purchasing plans for Parker's 37' Pilot Schooner. See here: http://www.parker-marine.com/pilo37page.html . I admire his cold molded construction techniques and am intrigued by many of his designs. But I wonder about the Pilot Schooner 37 (and his Pilot Schooner 45, too, for that matter): their broad bow and narrower stern remind me of a cod-headed mackerel-tailed boat -- not something i am interested in. His PS 37 is modeled after a "Baltimore clipper" or a 19th century Virginia pilot schooner.

I believe that a couple of the PS 45s have been built, but don't believe there have been any PS 37s.

Does anyone have thoughts about these hull shapes?

There was a time when this hull shape "cod head/mackeral tail" was seen as the norm,its been around a long time,nothing wrong with it. If you dont like the shape based purely on asthetics, then you should look at something else,but nothing wrong with it as a tried and tested sea going hull shape.

[CapnJ2ds]

I think you may be confusing the deck plan with the hull shape, which is somewhat different. As you have noted, Parker's Pilot Schooner designs are based on traditional models. Study of Chappelle's works and Culler's designs will reveal similar decklines, but these are not​ "cod's head and mackerel tail" shapes in hull form. The deck plans are wide forward because of considerable above-water flare, the object of which was to give buoyancy and suppress spray.

[Ian McColgin]

From what I've seen of Parker's boats, CapnJ2ds has it, but you need the lines, not just study plan, to see it. I know Culler's designs very well and some of Chappelle's and neither was doing the cod head/mackeral tail at the water. Culler favored what I call raking waterlines, where the maximum beam for any section was about in the middle from bow to stern at the keel and moved aft a little as you got to the load waterline and above. Some designers like Atkins take great care to keep those lines more symetrical. Since either approach can result in a boat with a huge wake, or a very flat small wake, I'm not sure that in itself makes much difference.

[philosophisticat]

I think you may be confusing the deck plan with the hull shape, which is somewhat different. As you have noted, Parker's Pilot Schooner designs are based on traditional models. Study of Chappelle's works and Culler's designs will reveal similar decklines, but these are not​ "cod's head and mackerel tail" shapes in hull form. The deck plans are wide forward because of considerable above-water flare, the object of which was to give buoyancy and suppress spray.

I did acquire the study plans, and see that the waterline and below waterline shape are brought in from the deck form, but still they look somewhat full to me in the bow when compared to other designs. It is probably not fair to call them cod's head/mack tail designs, but the fullness carried forward will surely affect the way she goes, although I am not sure what to make of it.

[Dakidus]

Some years ago I purched the study plans for his 33' SCOW. What I received for my $50 was only what was shown on the site plus the displacement which was indicated as N/A on the site. So I paid only for the displacement. Abolute waste of money. Beware.

[philosophisticat]

I am also not terribly happy with the two cabin design of Parker's schooners, which are separated by a solid bulkhead. He has designed an alternative walkthrough to starboard, but it adds nothing to interior volume and creates a potential problem if green water were shipped over the port side, with water trapped and nowhere to go but down the forward companionway.

Does anyone have a recommendation for other open-water capable schooner designs in the 37 - 42 foot range that are suitable for cold-molded construction?

[Sayla]

I am also not terribly happy with the two cabin design of Parker's schooners, which are separated by a solid bulkhead. He has designed an alternative walkthrough to starboard, but it adds nothing to interior volume and creates a potential problem if green water were shipped over the port side, with water trapped and nowhere to go but down the forward companionway.

Does anyone have a recommendation for other open-water capable schooner designs in the 37 - 42 foot range that are suitable for cold-molded construction?

Most any are suitable for cold-molded construction, in a way - if plans are traditional they would need either a rehash of the scantlings, weights and load points by an NA, or be simply framed as per original with hull skin substitution of the planking.

"New" cold-mold as per Reuel Parker is yet another thing again; plywood with t&g and bulkheads etc is more individual, i.e. not listed in scantling reference books that you may find regular cold-mold in.

Recommended schooner designs? - I'm taken in by the Peterson schooners - but for that size have a look here as well at Alden designs as well, nice boats (good value plans too)

http://www.aldendesigns.com/classics.html

But, this would be my personal favourite for a 42' schooner - Coaster II





sayla