Atkin Little Maid of Kent Design Query

[chrisgent3107@gmail.com]

Dear Forumites,

This is my very first post tho I have lurked on lots of Build sites for around one year now, particularly J. Madison's wonderful "Maid of Endor".

I would really appreciate advice from anyone with experience of Atkin plans. I bought the plans for a Litte Maid of Kent some months ago and am getting stuck on the concept of MOLDS. The Atkin plans seem to me to show the frames all lined up exactly on station lines. Intermediate frames are all shown to be centred between station lines.

My conundrum is this. I read in Chappelle that the Molds should all fall on station lines. So what am I misunderstanding? surely the two facts contradict!?!

George Buehler' backyard boat building book (which I find much easier to understand than Chappelle) explains the concept of placing molds in front of station lines aft of the max beam piint and vice versa fore of the max beam. (Got that bit!) But Buehler likes to avoid molds in V Bottom Chine Hulls as he proposes going staight to large strong sawn frames and avoiding molds altogether. Atkins plan on the other hand specify steam bent white oak frams which are light at only 1 1/2 inch square! I want to stay true to the Atkin design as his 30 foot schooner has really won my heart and inspired me.

Questions:
1. Should I miss out the molds too on this single chined hull? I would think this would create a flimsy structure to work on!
2. Should I put in say half the molds, then run ribands and, once faired up, insert the frames on the (unmolded) stations?

J. Madison's fantastic blog has helped me visualize solutions to most of my percieved problems, and his build photos also show similar Light Atkin frames. However, His molds are all in between frames. So maybe his frames are not supposed to be on Station lines. I thought Perhaps his designs are completely different because the Maid of Endor is not a Chine Hull design.

I hope that I have explained this OK above. If anyone could help point me in the right direction I would be very grateful.

Thank you all.

Chris Gent

[Bob Cleek]

It's been a long while, but I've sailed three different Maid of Kents and I can't imagine how you would steam bend a frame into one of them. They are basically a sharpie type hull with a single hard chine. I'd expect your frames would be one and the same as your "molds."

[David G]

[chrisgent3107@gmail.com]

HI Bob and David.

Wow you replied! The change from lurker to "poster" feels slightly intimidating. (All one's ignorance exposed to the WBF forum at large!!) Thank you both - I no longer feel that I am so alone in this planned endeavour.

Bob,
Atkin plans advise steam bent frames and he recommends to "Place wedges between planking and frames both sides of chine log & fasten logs to frames with 1/4 inch galv iron thru bolts." As the frames bend up to around 45 degrees at the chine pin the aft frames, would you think that larger sawn frames with gussets would be a better option? (This is what George Buehler also proposes - he uses 2 x 4. inches- a lot heavier than Atkin recommends!)

My only other build to date has been a 12 foot sharpie in ply and epoxy, later upgraded to include a simple lug sail. My choice of the V bottom Maid of Kent was made to keep the technical side of the build within the range of my limited skill set.

Having sailed several Little Maids in the distant past, how would you rate their sailing abilities? Currently, I expect to be sailing solo, mostly coastal hopping. Do you think this is a viable plan with the sail arrangements on the Maid? My sailing experience in the past has been mostly coastal on older Plastic tubs (Westerly GK24). I plan to cruise this Maid in the Java Sea (Indonesia) which is generally known for its light winds. Do you think that the total sail 438 sq ft is ok to keep me moving in relatively light airs? The build will be a retirement project in Java and I hoped to take advantage of the excellent hard woods at reasonable price there.

David G ,
You must have some knowledge of the Atkin Maid of Kent, if you have the lines ready to hand! Do you have any thoughts on the question of light steam bent frames vs Buehler's suggested kheavier 2x4 inch sawn frames? Any comments on the performance of this Maid of Kent and its suitability for mainly coastal cruising/ port hopping in comparatively sheltered waters in the Java Sea? Do you think I should be reading anything else in particular to prepare me for the building? Sorry, for the list of beginner's questions, but I am in a remote location now (Kuwait) and ALL boats here are motorized plastic, except for the Dhow look-alikes known locally as Boom, with Lateen sails. So, Any questions I would ask local builders would get answers in Arabic, Urdu, Hindi or Bangali language, which are all beyond me!

Again, thank you both sincerely for your responses!

Chris

[chrisgent3107@gmail.com]

My other reasons for choosing the Atkin Little Maid of Kent design:

1. Indonesian materials are limited and v. expesive to import. This is a traditionally rigged boat and such supplies as Galvanized wire is obtainable. Steel fasteners can be hot dip galvanized locally too. This should mean that repairs can also be done locally.
2. Standing room at 5 feet 9 inches is enough for me.
3. She can take quite a number of extended family on day trips (see Atkin web site photos of Little Maid of Kent - I counted 10 people on board in one of those shots!)
4. The schooner sail plan would have lots of flexibility for a wide variety of wind conditions.a
5. Ease of construction!?! - Am I right? The plans propose frames be boxed into keel. (see note below)


Framing being boxed into keels is such a huge contraversial topic and I am not yet convinced entirely. J.Madison's brilliant thread Building the Maid (of Endor) explains the method in gorgeous detail, so it is no longer that scary beast I once thought it might be. And I've read all the pros and cons re strength etc. Still haven't yet decided on this part, but will hold onto all the valuable opinions shown in thread until time is closer. I guess that boxing-in would be my choice if I elect steam bent light frames a la Atkin specs. The heavier sawn frames with gussets, if chosen, would probably be better not boxed into keel etc. - I think.

Any comments on this list of choices would be very welcome.
Chris.

[johngsandusky]

You build the boat over molds on the station lines, install the steamed frames in between, the remove the molds and install the other frames in their place.
I have not sailed on a Atkin design, but they do look a little undercanvassed to me.

[David G]

Chris,

I'm afraid I've never seen one of these boats. I simply know where to find the Atkin website, and how to post images:

http://www.atkinboatplans.com/Sail/L...aidOfKent.html

http://www.atkinboatplans.com/Photos...ent/index.html



I am an Atkin fan in general. I don't see why this boat wouldn't serve your purposes admirably. The only two caveats: if you have a lot of shallow water around your home port, there are more shoal-draft boats available; it won't be a single-handed vessel, methinks. If you are assured of having a crew who's willing to learn how to handle lines and such... great. If (as is often the case, I think) sailing will eventually devolve into a solo pursuit... there are also more appropriate designs.

[skaraborgcraft]

David, curious to know why you think the Maid would not be a suitable single hander? Apart from the jib,all the sails are self tending.
As regards to moulds and framing Johngsandusky has answered that. As usual with an Atkin plans, stray from the design at your own peril. I have only seen one Maid,sailed up from S.Africa,home made in steel, a nice wee ship. Undercanvassed....try a "golly wobbler" from the mainmast,bit like a fishermans staysail...but more spinnaker like.....good in light airs anyway.

[TR]

Ooof!........not for the faint of heart or the quick and dirty builder. This is a fine example of a vee bottom boat that's more complex to build than a round bottom one.

This is the build method I can think of this morning........
You are building this boat right side up. Loft using all the offsets provided, 14 molds plus the transom. Make the ballast, set up the keel, stem, and transom, then set up all your molds and run the ribbands. You will have lofted the chine log and have notches cut in the molds to accept the log, temporarily fastened to the molds. Bend in the first set of ribs (on this coast frames are sawn and ribs are bent) between the molds, fasten them to the chine log (I'll come back to this in a moment). Then go back and start removing molds one at a time and bending in the rest of the ribs. Probably start at the ends and work towards the middle (biggest piece last). I hope you have a good source of straight-grained green bending stock, there are some hard turns here. After all frames are in get the clamp in ASAP, and you will have added cross bands as you removed molds. From here proceed as usual with fitting all those little wedges and planking the hull as you remove ribbands.

Ed Monk (among others) was against running the chine log bolts through the frames. It seems a poor idea to put a hole in the frame at the point of highest stress. Monk ran another stringer inside the frames and bolted the chine log to that (I assume with blocking between), clamping the ribs between them.......

Section from Maid of Kent Construction Drawing

[chrisgent3107@gmail.com]

You build the boat over molds on the station lines, install the steamed frames in between, the remove the molds and install the other frames in their place.
I have not sailed on a Atkin design, but they do look a little undercanvassed to me.

John, Thank you. That clears up exactly what was worrying me. I do think I need to buy a book that covers this style of build. Chapelle is such a hard read, whilst being a great reference on so much. Buehler's Backyard boatbuilding is more my style, but I would still like to stick to Atkins specs as far as realistically possible. I too thought she looks a little low on canvas, but then i pondered how much time I will have spare in retirement. I.e. I won't be in any hurry to get to any of the 17,000 odd island in Indonesia and would probably be better off at a leisurely pace (and safe.)

Your advice is very much appreciated.
Chris

[TR]

Oh and woefully undercanvased........

With 4400 pounds of ballast she could easily be 15,000 pounds loaded for cruising, with 428 sq ft of sail that is an SA/D (sail area/displacement) ratio of 11.5. I think that's less than the Tahiti Ketch, average modern cruisers run in the 15-17 range.

[chrisgent3107@gmail.com]

You build the boat over molds on the station lines, install the steamed frames in between, the remove the molds and install the other frames in their place.
I have not sailed on a Atkin design, but they do look a little undercanvassed to me.

Thank you John. Simple and eloquent. I think that the undercanvassed aspect is veering towards a safety margin that I will welcome, esp if I end up single handing it. By the way the sails are mostly self tending. Your contribution is gratefully received. Chris.

[chrisgent3107@gmail.com]

David G, The Draft shouldn't be a problem. Almost all small towns and villages in Indonesia have active fishing fleets and altho I'm not yet sure, I think access to shelter is good in general around the coasts. Also there's only a minimal tidal range in the Java Sea.

I should be able to get crew. If the missus isn't up for it, local fishing boys will crew happily for around $3 per day. This aside, I'd much prefer to single hand if pressed. (Loner?) or should that be Loser?

Cheers Mate.

[chrisgent3107@gmail.com]

David, curious to know why you think the Maid would not be a suitable single hander? Apart from the jib,all the sails are self tending.
As regards to moulds and framing Johngsandusky has answered that. As usual with an Atkin plans, stray from the design at your own peril. I have only seen one Maid,sailed up from S.Africa,home made in steel, a nice wee ship. Undercanvassed....try a "golly wobbler" from the mainmast,bit like a fishermans staysail...but more spinnaker like.....good in light airs anyway.

Thank you. I now recall that the self tending saisl were a major part of the choice for the Maid. Indeed, the plans show a Main and fore gaff options (both sails) together with a self tending boomed jib too. BLIMEY, THIS THING IS GOING TO SAIL ITSELF! (Insert Homer Simpson's "DOH" here.) Seriously, I think the schooner rig and all the sail options inherent in it will simplify single handing rather than complicating it.

I,ve seen golly wobblers in some reading and will research more on them.

Truly appreciate your comments. Chris

[chrisgent3107@gmail.com]

Oh and woefully undercanvased........

With 4400 pounds of ballast she could easily be 15,000 pounds loaded for cruising, with 428 sq ft of sail that is an SA/D (sail area/displacement) ratio of 11.5. I think that's less than the Tahiti Ketch, average modern cruisers run in the 15-17 range.

Tad, Thank you Sir. Your build outline is very helpful and I am grateful for your knowledge and pointers. The warnings over how complex this undertaking may be are duly noted. Whilst I didn't seek a modern cruiser SA/D ratio, I must admit that under-canvassing may become a problem in certain circumstances. Two years ago, I just missed buying a Westsail (WETSNAIL?) 32 in Bali. The guy said he was selling because he was tired of having to motor around in the Java Sea. Even the Atkins admitted that their Eric, upon which the Westsail was based, was super safe but not the right boat for all men. I will think long and hard on this before I commit myself.

The drawing you attached to the first response is part of the drawings I received from Pat Atkin. This section shows a rabbeted chine. She also sent another drawing which showed a 2 part chine log, which i would probably opt for as a simpler alternative. I note your reference to Ed Monk and Others re an extra stringer to avoid weakening the frame at the bend point. I will try to look up his work on Google. Maybe I need to think that issue out carefully too!

Somehow the magic of this Little Maid seems to have caught me. I love the lines and the fact that it's a schooner really has me hooked. I could probably afford a more logical choice of vessel, but I am not sure that I will end up making the sensible pick.


Your knowledge and courteous responses are superb. 2 days ago I was intimidated by writing into a thread. I am really blown away by your and all the others' assistance/advice.


Sincere thanks .


Chris

[TR]

Chris,

There's a pretty decent book (long out of print but available used) Modern Boat Building, by Edwin Monk. Another good general boatbuilding reference is Robert (Bob) Steward's Boatbuilding Manual. I would bet there's some useful writing by Billy Atkin on this bent-frame-hard-chine method. Finding it is the problem. It's probably in the Motorboating Ideal Series.

The simple solution to sail area is just make the masts 4-5' longer and the sails to suit.

[Bob Cleek]

Of the Maid of Kents I've known, one was traditionally built as designed, one was plywood and one welded steel. The traditionally built boat seemed the better sailer, but there are so many variables to that, one can't be sure in a limited exposure to a particular boat.

The Maid of Kent is a "character boat." She is built to be pretty (the original, IIRC, does not have the doghouse shown in the photo above.) and to look like a much larger boat. For that purpose, it's a rather neat little boat.

For the purposes you are describing, I'd say NOT! The Maid of Kent is undercanvased, but that is because she is small and light and can't carry much more sail than that. The biggest negative for your purposes is that she carries a schooner rig. The schooner rig really is not very efficient until you get up around forty feet and above. The Maid of Kent, for that reason, does not sail to windward as well as would just about any other rig choice on a boat of that size. You'd do much better with a cutter rig, or even a ketch, than a schooner in a boat under 40' or so.

Don't pick a boat for the "ease of construction." It's a lot easier to learn whatever skill you might require than to live with a poor choice of boat for the sake of it being easier to build, which in many cases isn't the case at all. Building the Maid of Kent will pose all the challenges of building just about any hull design and some others don't, like how to deal with the chine log and frame intersections.

If you like Atkin, and there's plenty of reasons feel that way, for what you are contemplating, this would lbe a much better choice:

Tally Ho Major:

Although, you can see from this photo why modifying a good designer's plans is almost always a really dumb idea. Why they felt the need to add a doghouse, I'll never know!

[skaraborgcraft]

I could just be having a bad hair day,BUT, i find it rather irksome when someone else,be it with the best of intentions, decides that someones dream boat is not suited to that persons dream. It may be that Chris has decided to look into building a boat that may push his boundries of skills,and thats not a bad thing.As for taste or round Vs chine,thats another personal thing....i happen to like a good chine boat,though understand that sometimes the designs will have compromises,and that sometimes,a chine boat can be more difficult to build than round bilge. Maid may be small and light with a small percentage of ballast,but that does not automatically kill the option of adding more sail area,as has been done to many Tahiti. Tads given Chris some good book suggestions, and i couldnt suggest any further reading that may be applicable to the boat in question. Perhaps i should suggest that Chris builds a Venus 28 from that good local hardwood,and then when he finds its too heavy and undercanvassed,and not the schooner he is dreaming of,i could make him a silly offer to take it off his hands. Again, im sure Bob is trying to be helpfull, but one mans dreams are anothers nightmare,there are 100s of better designs out there and possibly suited to his needs better,BUT they dont enter into Chris,s ideal of his schooner dream boat. Chris, you have admitted,by asking the question about the ease of building a chine boat,which shows your limited knowledge,but also that you are prepared to ask. If you have read Beauhler, you will know how he loves to make the case for chine boats,and most of its valid.....im sure some may say thats only because he designs chine boats and wants to push his own plan sales. Whatever, build the boat that YOU feel capable of building Chris, because its YOU who has to do the work, pay for it,maintain it and use it. Cheers

Edit. COOT, another Atkin design of 27ft also a schooner has been proven by many ocean miles...."Nakomis" even passed through the Gota Canal here in Sweden a few years ago,and she looked better in the flesh than she does on paper.Either way,hard to understand why anyone would say schooner rig does not work on small boats,when clearly it has been tested.I dont think he would have kept the rig had it not worked for him over so much time and mileage. It MAY not be the most efficient,but errornous to denounce it like that. Just sayin. Cheers

[john welsford]

When you are considering the size of the rig, bear in mind that you will be becalmed or nearly so far more often than you will be out in dangerously windy conditions. Do remember that Earling Tambs lost his "Teddy" after having sailed her halfway around the planet, because he was unable to get her to move in very light winds and the tide set him on a reef.
Its dangerous to be up on deck trying to set "extras" in an effort to get enough sail area up there to move her, and much more so to be up there pulling it all down when its blowing up than it is to be pulling a reef or two in with properly organised gear.
Imho an under rigged boat is more dangerous than one with adequate sail area.

John Welsford

Tad, Thank you Sir. Your build outline is very helpful and I am grateful for your knowledge and pointers. The warnings over how complex this undertaking may be are duly noted. Whilst I didn't seek a modern cruiser SA/D ratio, I must admit that under-canvassing may become a problem in certain circumstances. Two years ago, I just missed buying a Westsail (WETSNAIL?) 32 in Bali. The guy said he was selling because he was tired of having to motor around in the Java Sea. Even the Atkins admitted that their Eric, upon which the Westsail was based, was super safe but not the right boat for all men. I will think long and hard on this before I commit myself.

The drawing you attached to the first response is part of the drawings I received from Pat Atkin. This section shows a rabbeted chine. She also sent another drawing which showed a 2 part chine log, which i would probably opt for as a simpler alternative. I note your reference to Ed Monk and Others re an extra stringer to avoid weakening the frame at the bend point. I will try to look up his work on Google. Maybe I need to think that issue out carefully too!

Somehow the magic of this Little Maid seems to have caught me. I love the lines and the fact that it's a schooner really has me hooked. I could probably afford a more logical choice of vessel, but I am not sure that I will end up making the sensible pick.


Your knowledge and courteous responses are superb. 2 days ago I was intimidated by writing into a thread. I am really blown away by your and all the others' assistance/advice.


Sincere thanks .


Chris

[TR]

the original, IIRC, does not have the doghouse shown in the photo above.

But it actually suits her character and adds useability in the form of standing headroom in the galley. In a place (PNW) where it's always raining this is huge......

The Maid of Kent is undercanvased, but that is because she is small and light and can't carry much more sail than that.

Can't carry "much more" in what? Perhaps full sail is what she will carry in the usual 25-30 knots of San Francisco Bay, but in our usual 5-8 she can carry a great deal more.

The biggest negative for your purposes is that she carries a schooner rig. The schooner rig really is not very efficient until you get up around forty feet and above. The Maid of Kent, for that reason, does not sail to windward as well as would just about any other rig choice on a boat of that size. You'd do much better with a cutter rig, or even a ketch, than a schooner in a boat under 40' or so.

Chris shouldn't have it because it "is not very efficient"........Well then I guess we should all be sailing the latest plastic whatzit? We're told they are terribly efficient, it must be so.......But efficient at what? Take a pair of identical Maids, schooner rig on one ketch rig on the other, identical sail area......reach/reach race course....who wins? Best skipper every time.......

Thank god we don't all want the "most efficient" thing, that some are interested in other attributes.......

And I don't think there's any good reason to say schooners under 40' are "are not very efficient". I don't think size has anything to do with it. How well a particular boat works has to do with many things, the rig is only part of it.

[Bob Cleek]

I could just be having a bad hair day,BUT, i find it rather irksome when someone else,be it with the best of intentions, decides that someones dream boat is not suited to that persons dream. It may be that Chris has decided to look into building a boat that may push his boundries of skills,and thats not a bad thing.As for taste or round Vs chine,thats another personal thing....i happen to like a good chine boat,though understand that sometimes the designs will have compromises,and that sometimes,a chine boat can be more difficult to build than round bilge. Maid may be small and light with a small percentage of ballast,but that does not automatically kill the option of adding more sail area,as has been done to many Tahiti. Tads given Chris some good book suggestions, and i couldnt suggest any further reading that may be applicable to the boat in question. Perhaps i should suggest that Chris builds a Venus 28 from that good local hardwood,and then when he finds its too heavy and undercanvassed,and not the schooner he is dreaming of,i could make him a silly offer to take it off his hands. Again, im sure Bob is trying to be helpfull, but one mans dreams are anothers nightmare,there are 100s of better designs out there and possibly suited to his needs better,BUT they dont enter into Chris,s ideal of his schooner dream boat. Chris, you have admitted,by asking the question about the ease of building a chine boat,which shows your limited knowledge,but also that you are prepared to ask. If you have read Beauhler, you will know how he loves to make the case for chine boats,and most of its valid.....im sure some may say thats only because he designs chine boats and wants to push his own plan sales. Whatever, build the boat that YOU feel capable of building Chris, because its YOU who has to do the work, pay for it,maintain it and use it. Cheers

Edit. COOT, another Atkin design of 27ft also a schooner has been proven by many ocean miles...."Nakomis" even passed through the Gota Canal here in Sweden a few years ago,and she looked better in the flesh than she does on paper.Either way,hard to understand why anyone would say schooner rig does not work on small boats,when clearly it has been tested.I dont think he would have kept the rig had it not worked for him over so much time and mileage. It MAY not be the most efficient,but errornous to denounce it like that. Just sayin. Cheers

Normally, I wouldn't bother, but, hey, he asked.

[Bob Cleek]

But it actually suits her character and adds useability in the form of standing headroom in the galley. In a place (PNW) where it's always raining this is huge......



Can't carry "much more" in what? Perhaps full sail is what she will carry in the usual 25-30 knots of San Francisco Bay, but in our usual 5-8 she can carry a great deal more.



Chris shouldn't have it because it "is not very efficient"........Well then I guess we should all be sailing the latest plastic whatzit? We're told they are terribly efficient, it must be so.......But efficient at what? Take a pair of identical Maids, schooner rig on one ketch rig on the other, identical sail area......reach/reach race course....who wins? Best skipper every time.......

Thank god we don't all want the "most efficient" thing, that some are interested in other attributes.......

And I don't think there's any good reason to say schooners under 40' are "are not very efficient". I don't think size has anything to do with it. How well a particular boat works has to do with many things, the rig is only part of it.

The purpose of the schooner rig is to break up the sail area so it is easier to handle. There is no point to the drawbacks of a schooner rig until the sails get large enough that breaking them up so they can be handled by a small crew is advantageous. A small schooner like Maid of Kent is a nice looking fun boat to sail. It isn't a serious cruiser, which is what the man says he intends to use it for. The top hamper slows it down. Frankly, the foresail in a schooner that size is near useless. The complexity of the rig makes it more work to sail without any payback. One could theoretically rig a gollywobbler on a Maid of Kent, but at some point the boat isn't big enough to carry the crew to handle all those sails at one time. Fun? Sure, but I don't think that if somebody is going to build a boat in that size and weight class for ocean cruising, even in lighter aired seas, that it's really a practical choice. The fact that someone has made a long voyage in one design or another doesn't really mean anything except that they are competent seamen. More small boat long voyages have succeeded because of the sailor's skill than the boat's abilities.

And, as for "standing head room in the galley," for what? I'd prefer to sit and cook, particularly underway, and save the windage at that. The doghouse precludes the only place a rigid dinghy could be conveniently stowed on most boats this size, BTW.

But your mileage obviously varies.

[TR]

The purpose of the schooner rig is to break up the sail area so it is easier to handle.

Bob, I'll differ on this as well, but only slightly I think an important reason to opt for the schooner is the ability to balance the boat (under working sail) at any angle to the wind. I don't think "handling" sails of only 200 odd square feet is an issue (If one means setting and furling). With three smaller sails you don't reef just hoist and lower, similar to a ketch. It's a bit different than a cutter because the sails sails are spread further fore and aft....And some will say that's a bad thing

And, as for "standing head room in the galley," for what?
But your mileage obviously varies.

It does....... judging from my inquiries, after a separate head, the most important feature in any design is standing headroom..........

[Bob Cleek]

Bob, I'll differ on this as well, but only slightly I think an important reason to opt for the schooner is the ability to balance the boat (under working sail) at any angle to the wind. I don't think "handling" sails of only 200 odd square feet is an issue (If one means setting and furling). With three smaller sails you don't reef just hoist and lower, similar to a ketch. It's a bit different than a cutter because the sails sails are spread further fore and aft....And some will say that's a bad thing




It does....... judging from my inquiries, after a separate head, the most important feature in any design is standing headroom..........

I think that in actual practice, you'd find that the main on Maid of Kent would require reefing fairly routinely if huge weather helm is to be avoided. She doesn't have the headsails to balance that main if not reefed. You can't be flying a big overlapping genny in any kind of wind that would require dropping the foresail.

As for an enclosed head and standing headroom... I don't think the latter is worth the space on any cruising boat and the former is a luxury that cannot justify sacrificing a broad expanse of cabin top and a clear view ahead nor incurring increased windage. I'd have to agree with L.F. Herreshoff on those two points. Particularly the enclosed head these days, with the holding tank requirements on MSDs. "Bucket and chuck it" is really the way to go in a small cruising boat. An enclosed head on a Maid of Kent would take up maybe 15 or 20 percent of the cabin space. I can't see spending that for what, ten minutes a day sitting on the crapper, not to mention the expense and hassle of maintaining the MSD system. I realize others disagree, of course.

[skaraborgcraft]

Again,its up to Chris to decide his own priorities when it comes to banging his head or taking a crap. It should be clear from the start that anyone even contemplating building a schooner like the Maid will not have "efficiency" (however you choose to define it) as their number one priority. A lot of common sense stuff goes outta the window when it comes to "dream ships". I dont believe Chris came here asking for alternative designs for his Java cruising, and if he had,then the Atkin Two Brothers would be a more suitable design than Tally Ho Major...IN MY OPINION, and for MY imagined scenario of cruising that area.....but i dont recall him asking. Cheers

[chrisgent3107@gmail.com]

When I started this thread, I wondered if I could possibly get answers to a few simple questions. Now , I am simply blown away by the number of informed and intelligent responses received. Thank you all for your interest and invaluable help. You force me to think about so much more.

To recap on all that's been raised:

Schooner vs Cutter: I'm afraid the cutter just doesn't "cut" it for me. I saw Tally Ho Major early on and it looked good for a while, but a bit too big and it was a wine glass shaped hull = hard to build? Ooof, as Tad said earlier. The single chine v bottom schooner on the other hand should have been an easier build, but Tad's Oooff was meant for that. Oh, Well.

Difficult to build: Well, I have wavered in and out of the intimidated state several times before on this choice. My usual response to that is 1. Fear 2. Shame 3. Boneheadedness. It,s happened to me before. Kit sports car. Solo sailing. Stitch and glue row boat. Converted to home made lug sail dinghy. and on and on. Having read J. Madison's Building of Maid of Endow on WBF numerous times and an expanding list of text books, I no longer fear the build as I once did. And then, the responses I've received from you guys, assure me that when I do get the build started there will be lots of very experienced philanthropists on WBF to keep me from going too wrong.

Schooner ease of handling: More sails more options. Lazyjacks on main and fore. Small sails which are "rove" and can all be self-tending. (I think I'd opt for the boomed jib as on shown on Atkin web site too.) The fore sail can be dropped in a big blow, albeit I might have to reef the main to avoid weather helm. I've also read articles about small schooners being set up ok for simple self steering on tiller/wheel alone. Agreed, solo sailing will be something I'll have to ease into slowly, but I think it will become my preferred way eventually.

Headroom/ Doghouse: I couldn't agree more that the dog house thing detracts form the beauty of the Maid. Happily, I'm 5 ft 8 in and my missus is even closer to the floor, so I think we'll be ok. Toilet headroom also no prob - think I'd opt for the bucket and chuck it simplicity. Love all sorts of messy stuff but draw the line at poo/effluent plumbing repairs - Ugh! And it'd be one less thru hull to worry about too.

Romance/ Infatuation
Come on guys, please tell me you wouldn't fall in love with the lines of Little Maid. Under-canvassed maybe, but everything is compared to something else. What else at 30 foot has a Taff Rail like that, two sticks, schooner bow, simple standing rigging, self-tending sails, gaff option for fore and main? How many sailors can claim to have a golly wobbler? or possibly a gaff topsail? (Not sure this is true?) I'm going to look into that idea of extending the main mast by 4-5 ft. The last black and white photo on the Atkin web site shows a Little Maid with an extra tall mast. Is that for a golly wobbler or a gaff topsail?

When I picked a schooner I realised that she would not sail as close to the wind as other designs. I am still leaning towards a double gaff. I want it to be my indulgence and I'm not going to be in a big hurry to get anywhere in retirement. If I find myslef in trouble becalmed in a tide drifting me towards trouble, I will be happy to switch on the egg-whisk to move to a safer part of what J. Madison calls the big blue wobbly thing. ( Love that name!) On the other hand, I also hear that Gaff rigged schooners can be great off the wind too!?!

With all the above, I hope I have listed the important issues. I assure you I respect all your views. in the end, as more than one of you have already said, the choices are mine to be made.

I welcome any other comments you may have.

Chris

[skaraborgcraft]

Its your dream Chris,you go for it. Everyone here loves to see a build coming together,so,if you eventually get round to it,just remember lots of pictures. Its no rocket science,do the reading,understand why you should do things a certain way, and just do it!
Anything you get stuck on,someone here will be able to help,or at least advise. Good luck. Cheers

[gilberj]

For what its worth, I sailed a bit on an Atkin Ensenada, pretty much the same hull, but cutter rigged. She was stiff and powerful, and fast within the context of the time. She had a fairly short waterline allowing for reduced wetted surface and a counter allowing for the waterline to lengthen out as the speed picked up. We had a similar thing going on with Windrush, a smaller but somewhat similar general hull configuration. She was surprisingly good drifter, and could reach hull speed pretty easily. Special light air sails can be part of the plan, when most of your sailing is in light airs.
The schooner places the masts in less inconvenient places, one at the forward end of the house and the other at the aft end of the house. Of course in the photo above the raised deck house is aft of the main.

I'd probably consider a ketch. I like the geometry for a cruising boat. The mizzen may be somewhat in the way, in the cockpit.

Perhaps a yawl might be best here. The first reef is taking in the mizzen, for balance, but it is still there for balance in light airs as many of these boats develope a lee helm in these conditions, and provides somewhere to hang a mizzen staysail if you want to play. The mizzen would of course be aft of the tiller and out of the way. It may be rigged with a sprit boom to make handling it even easier.

I'd probably go with traditional straight frame construction, not with 2x4's as Beuhler does. The more wood you build into the structure diminishes your ballast and load capacity and raises the centre of gravity. Within some limits it does not add usefully to the strength of the vessel. I might consider alternating a bent frames and straight frames. The straight frames are the building mold and the bent frames can be reasonably easily added when the hull essentially complete and upright. The bent frames would help resisting racking forces better than the straight frames. Chappell liked mixing the frames like this. Some of these boats incorporate an inner chine log/stringer.

[johngsandusky]

Chris, you have a great attitude. I hope you find the boat of your dreams. It would be wonderful if you built it yourself. Don't worry too much about singlehanding, patience is the key. I routinely singlehand my boat, a 39' 16 ton ketch. Just keep some sea room and don't rush about the deck, you have more time than you think.

[chrisgent3107@gmail.com]

Its your dream Chris,you go for it. Everyone here loves to see a build coming together,so,if you eventually get round to it,just remember lots of pictures. Its no rocket science,do the reading,understand why you should do things a certain way, and just do it!
Anything you get stuck on,someone here will be able to help,or at least advise. Good luck. Cheers

Skaraborgcraft,

Thanks. Your comments have been very supportive and encouraging. I am still reading (now Robert Steward) after Tad's reminder. The build will be in Java and scheduled for 2015 (unless I get retired early in Kuwait.) I have plenty of time to do all the mental exercise now and stretch the imagination as far as possible. Patience was never my long suit, but retirement funding needs the time to include the Little Maid as well.

My sincere thanks for your personal input

Cheers.

[chrisgent3107@gmail.com]

For what its worth, I sailed a bit on an Atkin Ensenada, pretty much the same hull, but cutter rigged. She was stiff and powerful, and fast within the context of the time. She had a fairly short waterline allowing for reduced wetted surface and a counter allowing for the waterline to lengthen out as the speed picked up. We had a similar thing going on with Windrush, a smaller but somewhat similar general hull configuration. She was surprisingly good drifter, and could reach hull speed pretty easily. Special light air sails can be part of the plan, when most of your sailing is in light airs.
The schooner places the masts in less inconvenient places, one at the forward end of the house and the other at the aft end of the house. Of course in the photo above the raised deck house is aft of the main.

I'd probably consider a ketch. I like the geometry for a cruising boat. The mizzen may be somewhat in the way, in the cockpit.

Perhaps a yawl might be best here. The first reef is taking in the mizzen, for balance, but it is still there for balance in light airs as many of these boats develope a lee helm in these conditions, and provides somewhere to hang a mizzen staysail if you want to play. The mizzen would of course be aft of the tiller and out of the way. It may be rigged with a sprit boom to make handling it even easier.

I'd probably go with traditional straight frame construction, not with 2x4's as Beuhler does. The more wood you build into the structure diminishes your ballast and load capacity and raises the centre of gravity. Within some limits it does not add usefully to the strength of the vessel. I might consider alternating a bent frames and straight frames. The straight frames are the building mold and the bent frames can be reasonably easily added when the hull essentially complete and upright. The bent frames would help resisting racking forces better than the straight frames. Chappell liked mixing the frames like this. Some of these boats incorporate an inner chine log/stringer.

I see what you mean about Ensenada. The hulls are very similar and I'm very encouraged that you found her stiff, responsive and fast for an older design. Mmm.

I believe I will go for steam bent frames as Atkin proposes and others here have outlined a moulding method which sounds right to me. (Molds on stations, then bent frames between, then more bent frames to replace molds.) More reading yet to be done on that score yet. Of course, I still need to ensure that the right type of green straight grained wood stock can be sourced in Indonesia. The local builders there seem to use either Bangkirai or Teak for most traditional craft. I also hear that Chengal wood is used a lot in neighbouring Malaysia. I know all 3 are good rot resistant woods, but need to gen up on which would be the best available choice for bending ribs.

An inner chine/log stringer is also likely to be part of the plan too. Need to obtain another recommended work by Ed Monk on that topic, which I have found available on Amazon books.

As far as light air sails go, I still have a lot of studying and thought to give to this subject. Bob G has commented on probable need to reef the main regularly (if the fore sail is doused). Perhaps I should first see how well I manage the standard rig first, before I start thinking about further extending the canvas!?! (Gollywobblers, assymetric? spinnaker, Fisherman sail - Wow, I've got to build her yet!)

Anyway, your comments are great and I thank you your kindness.

Cheers, Chris

[chrisgent3107@gmail.com]

Chris, you have a great attitude. I hope you find the boat of your dreams. It would be wonderful if you built it yourself. Don't worry too much about singlehanding, patience is the key. I routinely singlehand my boat, a 39' 16 ton ketch. Just keep some sea room and don't rush about the deck, you have more time than you think.

John,

Thanks for the kind words which I will use as an inspiration whenever I "wobble."

Cheers,
Chris

[chrisgent3107@gmail.com]

Chris,

There's a pretty decent book (long out of print but available used) Modern Boat Building, by Edwin Monk. Another good general boatbuilding reference is Robert (Bob) Steward's Boatbuilding Manual. I would bet there's some useful writing by Billy Atkin on this bent-frame-hard-chine method. Finding it is the problem. It's probably in the Motorboating Ideal Series.

The simple solution to sail area is just make the masts 4-5' longer and the sails to suit.

Tad,
Just a note to let you know that I found the Ed Monk book on Amazon in soft cover form. Then realized that I already have Bob Steward's book. Had been ignoring it somewhat, maybe because Buehler's book is so hyped up on his own way to do chine hulls and perhaps I thought I had found an easy way out. Oops.

Busy ploughing thru Steward now and have ordered Ed Monk's Modern Boatbuilding from Amazon as well as something by Billy Atkin, hopefully, when I can find it.

Your build summary earlier was so concise and clear. I am consistently amazed by the generosity of the highly skilled WBF members such as you. Thank you sincerely.

If you don't mind me asking, do you think the higher main mast on the last black and white photo in the Atkin web site for Little Maid, was supposed to accomodate additional light air sails?

Cheers, Chris.

[chrisgent3107@gmail.com]

LittleMaidOfKent-01S.jpg

[TomF]

..As for ... standing headroom... I don't think the latter is worth the space on any cruising boat ....

I'm reminded of Tom Colvin's similar comment about headroom on some of the working sail vessels he designed. Said that the most important thing was really good sitting headroom anywhere you're likely to sit down below - but that standing headroom shouldn't be a priority in small to moderate sized boats. As he said, "there's plenty of standing headroom on deck." Colvin had similar views on enclosed heads ... but deferred somewhat when poked about the realities of cruising in mixed company.

[skaraborgcraft]

Chris, that looks like a raised top-mast,that can also be doused(bought down) when required. Personally i would rather have the taller pole mast OR a genourously sized top-sail,and leave the rig as standard. One can have too many strings to play with....unless you enjoy that sort of thing.

Re;timber. Some of those eastern hardwoods are really dense,it would be good if you could get some weights per CuFt to compare against the reccomended timber. You may have to decrease the scantlings slightly. You could use teak for absolutely everything,IF its of a quality suitable to go into a boat......i look back in horror about the amount of teak that went to landfill at a certain yard i worked at,suffice to say,not all teak is fit to go to sea!. Any idea what the local builders are using? Cheers

[TR]

As for an enclosed head and standing headroom... I don't think the latter is worth the space on any cruising boat and the former is a luxury that cannot justify sacrificing a broad expanse of cabin top and a clear view ahead nor incurring increased windage. I'd have to agree with L.F. Herreshoff on those two points. Particularly the enclosed head these days, with the holding tank requirements on MSDs. "Bucket and chuck it" is really the way to go in a small cruising boat. An enclosed head on a Maid of Kent would take up maybe 15 or 20 percent of the cabin space. I can't see spending that for what, ten minutes a day sitting on the crapper, not to mention the expense and hassle of maintaining the MSD system. I realize others disagree, of course.

Bear with me while I talk a little about cruising boat design in general. This is more to get my own thoughts organized rather than argue any particular points. I understand and sympathize with the above sentiments but there are alternatives, as Bob mentions.

When designing Little Maid Billy Atkin was working with the technology and within the expectations of the time (I'm not sure but approximately the 1930's). Families who went cruising in a Little Maid probably grew up on the water and did not also own an RV and a vacation condo somewhere. Wives probably spent the same or less time on the boat with their husbands, buying a Bayliner was not an alternative (few if any production boats) and there were few marinas to visit. Today's sailors would like their families to take part in boating, but it has to be "sold" in some way that's not too uncomfortable. Thus the separate head and standup galley desire, with which I sympathize. When I was in my 20's cruising for 10 days on an Eric Junior was a delight, headroom and no head was not an issue at all. I still enjoy small/open boat cruising, but only for so long, then it's nice to have some shelter and convenience.

Today's thought on the issue........note that while the head is separate, the rest is one open space to gain maximum visual interior space.

[skaraborgcraft]

Tad, is that engine on display in the saloon? Doesnt look like its under the sole? Cheers

[Bob Cleek]

The sense I get from your comments, Chris, is that you are concerned about your boatbuilding skill levels and that this is somewhat limiting your choice of boats. (So many boats to consider... what's a guy to do?)

Don't be intimidated. You will surprise yourself. This stuff isn't rocket science at all. If you want a good book on traditional construction that also addresses modern adhesives and such, Larry Pardey's "Details of Classic Yacht Construction - The Hull" (or something like that) is an excellent "how to do it" manual. However, Pete Culler said it best: "Experience starts when you begin." (Or something like that.) There really aren't many differences between boat types and ease of construction, once you get past plywood boxes. Once you've figured out one thing in one part of the boat, you have that skill to use elsewhere. The learning curve is exponential. Fear not!

Secondly, I'd caution you to do your best to erradicate all trace of romance in your deliberations. I know it's hard, if not impossible to accomplish this completely. You have "schooner-itis." The schooner is a beautiful rig and I am also partial to gaff schooners, but it is impractical in small boats and for ocean cruising in small boats, it is most often a pain in the butt. You are thinking of all the advantages of a schooner rig, like a huge sail inventory, fidded topmasts and topsails and so on, but all these advantages only apply to large vessels. Managing a gaff topsail or a gollywobbler requires a lot of deck space and often crew. Popping a gollywobbler singlehanded would be quite a trick. (Can you manage two halyards, a tack and a sheet all at the same time?) Even if one can, you end up with a small boat that is chock full of "strings to pull," which becomes a lot of work to sail. Certainly, a "character boat' can be great fun on a limited basis, but for days on end at sea? Not! For example, the taffrail on Maid of Kent serves no useful purpose whatsoever, except to make her look like a much larger vessel from a distance. Is this really where you want to put your building energy? Maid of Kent was designed as a tabloid (minature) schooner for people who loved schooners but couldn't manage getting a large one. Nothing wrong with that, but you should decide whether you want to pursue the "schooner dream" and live with limited offshore cruising options, or pass on the schooner and go for a serious cruising yacht.

Just sayin...

[gilberj]

I sailed and raced quite a bit on a friends boat. It had an enclosed head which was seldom used. While sailing/racing the person in need of relief used a bucket in the cabin with the companion closed for privacy.
Our own boat has the head hidden under a seat, but not enclosed. None of the women (or men for that matter) who have used it have minded. We certainly give privacy by closing the companion and letting them get along with their business without observers. From my point of view I would rather not enclose it because the enclosure itself never seems big enough to be comfortable, on a small boat.
Serious thought should be give to making the galley workable and user friendly, whether its a stand-up or sit down working space.
Sail handling, setting, working, reefing, and furling and securing once in port is something to consider, as you get older. I think you mentioned this project as a retirement project. The more work it is to get going and then putting it to bed, will discourage a lot of spontaneity. I know a lot of people who seldom actually get out because it is a lot of work.

[skaraborgcraft]

.......preferably a plastic one with absolutely no soul or charachter,plenty of those around,and oh, a single stick,maybe even a free standing one in carbon fibre with just one mylar sail,you know,in the name of efficiency and all that. Dont want any brightwork on deck either,too much sun means you will be varnishing too often,and we dont need too much to do when we are retired,better yet will be an entire interior moulded in grp so you can just hose it all down once a week/ month depending on your own hygiene habits.
Shouldnt be too hard to find second hand somwhere,and what a waste of time it would be to be hitting your fingers with a hammer and learning new stuff building a boat when you could off sailing next week. Dreams huh.......who needs em? Just sayin. Cheers

[TR]

Tad, is that engine on display in the saloon? Doesnt look like its under the sole? Cheers

No chance it's going under the sole in a boat this size, must be in a box. Inboard engine purchase and installation is a major project and expense that, where I building this boat for myself, I would eliminate. A good 4-stroke in a well is just fine and takes almost no time to install. No drilling long holes, machining bearings, couplings, shaft and prop, no endless trips to Lordco for fuel fittings or exhaust fittings or cooling system fittings. Just build the box and clamp her in there. The major problem is the low alternator output of these outboards, just enough to charge a starting battery. But today solar panels and windmills work well and silently to do the job.

Yes, you can install the inboard but with a slightly different interior arrangement.

[skaraborgcraft]

Tad,i agree outboards can be an easy solution,but i guess it depends how much you want to rely on the auxillary. I do like having a large slow turning prop powered by diesel...i think i have had a 30 odd hour continous run under engine,but i could never have done the same with a petrol outboard,even a fourstroke,it would be too expensive around Europe. Anyway,i believe gas/petrol is pretty cheap around Indonesia,so maybe a good Hi-Thrust long legged outboard would be a good option for Chris....it would certainly save some initial expense,though im not sure about long term .Keeping the prop in the water has always appeared to be a challange in sloppy water.


(Tad,took a cruise by you page recently,loving the Wedge Point 27......if really frustrating as been drawing something very similar,but a few feet shorter! How accurate that weight in cruise trim? Seems really light. PM if you wish)

[chrisgent3107@gmail.com]

The sense I get from your comments, Chris, is that you are concerned about your boatbuilding skill levels and that this is somewhat limiting your choice of boats. (So many boats to consider... what's a guy to do?)

Don't be intimidated. You will surprise yourself. This stuff isn't rocket science at all. If you want a good book on traditional construction that also addresses modern adhesives and such, Larry Pardey's "Details of Classic Yacht Construction - The Hull" (or something like that) is an excellent "how to do it" manual. However, Pete Culler said it best: "Experience starts when you begin." (Or something like that.) There really aren't many differences between boat types and ease of construction, once you get past plywood boxes. Once you've figured out one thing in one part of the boat, you have that skill to use elsewhere. The learning curve is exponential. Fear not!

Secondly, I'd caution you to do your best to erradicate all trace of romance in your deliberations. I know it's hard, if not impossible to accomplish this completely. You have "schooner-itis." The schooner is a beautiful rig and I am also partial to gaff schooners, but it is impractical in small boats and for ocean cruising in small boats, it is most often a pain in the butt. You are thinking of all the advantages of a schooner rig, like a huge sail inventory, fidded topmasts and topsails and so on, but all these advantages only apply to large vessels. Managing a gaff topsail or a gollywobbler requires a lot of deck space and often crew. Popping a gollywobbler singlehanded would be quite a trick. (Can you manage two halyards, a tack and a sheet all at the same time?) Even if one can, you end up with a small boat that is chock full of "strings to pull," which becomes a lot of work to sail. Certainly, a "character boat' can be great fun on a limited basis, but for days on end at sea? Not! For example, the taffrail on Maid of Kent serves no useful purpose whatsoever, except to make her look like a much larger vessel from a distance. Is this really where you want to put your building energy? Maid of Kent was designed as a tabloid (minature) schooner for people who loved schooners but couldn't manage getting a large one. Nothing wrong with that, but you should decide whether you want to pursue the "schooner dream" and live with limited offshore cruising options, or pass on the schooner and go for a serious cruising yacht.

Just sayin...

Bob,

An eloquent and strong rationale argued here above. Thank you.

OK, here goes.

"Hi! My name is Chris and I am a Schooner-holic......"

Seriously though,

Your points are very well made. I started out wanting an Eric. Then I read the build difficulty level was high and realized it was better suited to ocean crossing than idling around the Java Sea. Eventually, I moved on to the Little Maid of Kent for all the reasons I've already expressed earlier. I may be a hopeless romantic about lots of stuff, but your comment " .......decide whether you want to pursue the "schooner dream" and live with limited offshore cruising options, or pass on the schooner and go for a serious cruising yacht" brought me up sharply. You are right and, Yes, I want to build a serious cruising yacht, much more than I want romantic 2 sticks and a pretty taff rail.

So, all the good common sense accumulated within the WBF contributors to this thread has prevailed. Thank you guys for making me think long and hard about the direction I was taking.

Therefore, ........... I need now another target design to pursue for the dream going forward. What follows may be repetitive, but it is now a slightly revised list of preferences:

1. Don't any longer see a need to restrict the build to chine hull, esp if the Maid could have been more complex to build than a round hull. But I would still like to be building it myself, so no rocket science suggestions please.
2. Would dearly love to get 5 ft 9 in headroom and a separate head compartment, even if using a bucket system or similar. I am still thinking this should require a LOA of about 30 feet or more??
3. Would love to retain a gaff rig with staysail & bowsprit etc. if this is at all possible. I grew up on the Bristol Channel and vaguely remember BCCs sail by. A traditional look would be very appealing for me.
4. Ease of handling comes into it too.
5. Reasonable performance in light airs, without it being too tender if a squall hits. (Isn't this every boat owners standard request?)

That's all I can think of for now. (Still a bit shell-shocked I guess.) Realise that the requirements listed are not very specific, which really could open the flood gates in terms of ideas.

Could you place yourself in my shoes and put forward any of your own particular preferences?

Thank you all once again for your patience. You have collectively contributed to a greater degree of realism regarding my "addicted" state.

Cheers,

Chris

[skaraborgcraft]

Well, now you will end up ,possibly, with a lot of options and designs put forward. Yet you have gone from someone with a dream and a boat that you were obviously passionate about,to admitting you dont know what you want,except for a seaworthy cruising boat. Why do YOU think Maid would offer you "limited offshore cruising options"???? In all honesty it sounds like you need to take at least a 2 week yacht charter on a sub 40ft yacht and see how you find it. Theres absolutely nothing wrong with the Maid as an offshore boat, except for someone elses opinion that THEY would not go offshore in it!

So, lets start again. What type of wood construction do YOU think you are capable of building? Carvel,lapstrake,cold moulded, ply on frame or strip plank etc? Which of those would be within your comfort zone? Building a round bilge in strip is no harder than a chine boat really. But you need to make some fundemental design choices first, then things can be defined as progress is made and designs put forward. Not knowing the price of local materials or your budget will make suggestions more difficult,do you have a limited budget? Whats the minimum size you think is acceptable for your needs and whats the largest? How much time will be spent "offshore",how long between being able to add stores,water etc? The more information the easier to put forward something that may suit. That was a pretty fast turnaround. Cheers

EDIT: Its hard to put ourselves in your shoes not knowing the size of your wallet or your abilities and comfort zones. The more you can define your needs and wants the easier for people to help you. No point listing the 30+ designs that spring immiediatly to mind until you are more specific,what may suit me you may find objectionable. Good luck.

[chrisgent3107@gmail.com]

You deserve a more complete explanation. I will attempt to provide it here.

I started the thread to get answers to a couple of questions related to the building process. I got the answers I was looking for. Quickly, the thread expanded quickly to include lots of warnings about my choice of an undercanvassed gaff schooner, that could well be too much for me to handle if I take it offshore cruising. Having already bought the plans for Little Maid of Kent, I was still in the process of learning through books and WBF threads, the methods I should use for my planned build, when these two questions came up.

My sailing experience:
-Sailed a 5 metre twin bilge keel twin berth cruiser in UK (Tidal Thames Estuary) for 5 years in the early 70's.(my 20's)
Bit like young guy's camping exploits, nothing longer than 2 weeks of daytrips.
- 3 weeks Mediterranean sailing charter in the 1980's - 30 ft marconi rig cruiser (4berth)
Big Gap in the middle eastern desert (25 years) then
- Last three years in Kuwait - 1/3rd ownership of a Westerly GK24, mostly weekend racing in coastal Arabian Gulf waters.

Ability to build: I have only built a stitch and glue row boat so far. (On the basis that I needed to build something small before I approached something larger.)

Now I believe I could manage a Ply on frame build OK. I really wanted to challenge myself when I aimed at a single chine boat like the Maid of Kent. Then some said this choice was more complex than some round bottom hulls. Ok, still moving forward, I still think I would attempt a Carvel planked hull. (I haven't even thought about Lapstrake, strip planking or cold moulded at all, so I guess you could count these out for me.)

Budget and choice of materials: I have set myself a budget of USD50,000. If the price of hard woods in Indonesia break the barrier, then I would next look to Ply on Frame to try to reduce costs. Plywood is a major product in Indonesia and I believe high quality can be found at very good prices. I also the Little Maid for expected low cost of simple rigging and the fact that Atkin proposes Galvanized iron for most of the fastenings. ( I know I can get a great 2nd hand plastic or steel cruiser for this budget, but that was never really the point for me!)

Expected use of the boat: Initially I would expect to be coastal hopping, but as experience expands I would anticipate to extend these hops to up to 10 Days (max) crossings to other major islands in Indonesia. Java Sea is shallow. Winds are generally light to moderate and follow seasonal trade wind patterns. 4 months a year NW and another 4 months a year SE trades. The irregular weather seems to be regular rain storms, which can be quite squally. (I believe that they are fairly easy to spot coming, so no particular panic needed and are normally late afternoon or evening events. I think.)

Turnaround.....
The warnings received, from WBF forumites re unsuitability for offshore work, under-canvassed, hard to build, hard to manage alone .... all this rang in my ears. When plenty of the more experienced around you warn caution, it seemed foolhardy to ignore them. To make it worse, I have worked most of my life in a risk management - Sailing is about the riskiest thing I do these days - which is what makes it so great!

Anyway, I hope that this clarifies my actions. You have been a stalwart supporter of my earlier choice, for which I thank you sincerely.

Only 4 days ago, I thought I had it all worked out and just needed to check a few build technicalities. Now I am "all at sea" - guess even that's not too bad a thing eh.

Best wishes.

[skaraborgcraft]

Seems to me Chris you have the ability to sail no problem,but have not done the liveaboard,long term sailing. Maybe i will leave those that have the OPINION that Maid will not siut your purpose to guide you to a craft that is easier to build and more suitable for your needs. ANY boat of this size is a major commitment in time and energy. A large ply on frame chine boat could be built faster than any round bilge,even though some may disagree. Is the building time such a big issue to you?
"hard to build" .....compared to what? A 12 foot rowing boat...of course! Compared to Hess cutter,then NO! You cant compare apples with oranges is a comment used a lot on here. An "Eric" built in teak would be an asset,but too many here will say its too slow....compared to an Americas Cup boat...yes.....but how fast do you want to go? How about a lightweight modern style Ply boat from Dundly Dix,or is that not your cup of tea? You can still fit it with a wooden mast and galv wire shrouds.
At the end of the day....after maybe years of work....if you cannot say to yourself,whilst rowing ashore.looking at the boat you have built,and think "what a great boat,worth every minute" then its not worth building. In my opinion,if the boat does not set your pulse racing on a flat peice of paper,its hardly likely to do so full size. Lifes too short to build an ugly boat,but its up to you Chris to decide whats ugly and whats not......taff rails dont do anything for me at all, but i dont feel i should mention it if its part of a style you like. I have a passion for double ended yachts,but others dont, i dont like blondes,others go crazy for them....you get the idea.....

[TR]

Tad,i agree outboards can be an easy solution,but i guess it depends how much you want to rely on the auxillary. I do like having a large slow turning prop powered by diesel...i think i have had a 30 odd hour continous run under engine,but i could never have done the same with a petrol outboard,even a fourstroke,it would be too expensive around Europe. Anyway,i believe gas/petrol is pretty cheap around Indonesia,so maybe a good Hi-Thrust long legged outboard would be a good option for Chris....it would certainly save some initial expense,though im not sure about long term .Keeping the prop in the water has always appeared to be a challange in sloppy water.

The specific consumption (g/KW/hr) of a diesel will (AFAIK) always be lower, and if one were building a boat to make longish trips under power I would recommend the diesel. But for the average (is there such a thing?) weekend cruiser who puts 10-20 hrs on his motor per year, the vast expense of a diesel (installed cost) is not worth it. This has become true because 4-stroke outboards are more common and thus reasonably priced, small ones burn little fuel, and they are very reliable. And you can take them home for the winter, keep it warm and dry and not corroding away. I've been using a 5HP Mercury (badged Nissan) for years, every day, it just keeps going. I have three others, a Seagull, 2-stroke Yamaha, and a Honda 2, that all come and go, rarely operating what I consider properly. And I have done long trips with the Merc, not 30 hours straight but certainly 12-14, usually towing other boats, and the fuel used was surprisingly small.

Keeping the prop in the water is the reason for the inboard well, coupled with a long shaft it will be under the boat instead of behind it.

(Tad,took a cruise by you page recently,loving the Wedge Point 27......if really frustrating as been drawing something very similar,but a few feet shorter! How accurate that weight in cruise trim? Seems really light. PM if you wish)

When designing for unknown individual (mostly amateur) builders, all the designer can do about weight is indicate his wishes. The result will be different, how different we don't know. The Wedge Point is built the same as the Berry Point 26, she's at 3600 with a heavier motor, thus I believe the Wedge Point could operate at 4000 pounds, but it's only a general hope at this point. For instance the Nomad 16 is being finished up right now, I went by for a visit and found about 300 pounds of electricals have been added. I had no idea this would be the case, and this is to a 1300 pound (design displacement) boat.........Not many people understand the rigor required to build a really light boat, and to keep it that way.....But it is the key to efficient operation. The Wedge Point is supposed to have a honeycomb cored roof, many won't do that as it costs considerable money, so another 100 pounds is added. The weight of the plywood alone can vary hugely between species.

[gilberj]

Each of us have our dream. Some are a little more informed than others, but the dream is by its very nature subjective. There have been a few warnings here about small schooners. I have sailed a little on several small schooners over the years. In my case they were all (3) Garden designs. All seemed fine and versitile, and two of the owners had their schooner for many years, the third was an intermediate boat, while the owner was building his own bigger boat. I see no reason to fault a well designed schooner rig on a smaller boat. Mr. Bolger experimented with very small schooners with reasonable success. I'd say 2 mast, with 3, 4 or 5 sail rigs are generally superior for passagemaking, but not as good as a sloop/cutter for day sailing. This is mostly to do with getting going and putting away.
My own boat is usually called a ketch, but could be considered a small schooner (3 sails). Though the mizzen mast is shorter than the main mast, the area of the mizzen is slightly larger than the area of the main. I sometimes jokingly refer to them as mizzen and foresail. The geometry works well. Whimbrel can be balanced to sail hands free on any course. Reducing sail in a breeze offers many options.
I like your choice of boat, partly because I have sailed on a similar design by the same designer. There is a danger in these small ships to make a caricature of a larger trading schooner or ketch, with everthing somewhat oversize. I'd resist that tendency. Our ropes, wires and rigging made with modern materials, and engineering are superior to what was available to our grandfathers.
Good luck

[TR]

Chris.....If you get over the schooner thing, Mark Smaalders has made a good attempt at simplifying the construction of small traditional cruisers.......http://smaalders.net/yacht_design/homemod.htm