Building Beth - cont'd

[outofthenorm]

This is a continuation of an earlier thread where I started the build. http://www.woodenboat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=84328

The last few days saw a lot of progress - but Beth attracts so much attention at the boatyard, I think I lost 2 hours each day answering questions! No worries though, I just talk about how easy it is to build, show them the sail plan, and watch the gleam come into their eyes.



On Friday I installed both sheer strakes - western red cedar - and did all the fitting for the daggerboard case and bed logs - and that process taught me a lesson I'll share.

As the first picture shows, the hull is resting on two workmate-type benches, mostly unsupported over its length. I just flip it over to work on top, bottom or the sides.



I fitted the case to a "T", working hard to get the front and bottom into perfect contact. When I was happy with it I prepared to install it by doing a a dry run of the glue up with all the clamps in place.



Guess what? It didn't fit!! There were big gaps, and for a minute I thought the whole thing was upside down. After a few deep breaths and a few more choice words, I realized what had happened.

The issue was that the unsupported bottom had sagged a bit - enough so that when it was properly supported and pushed into place, the relationship between the bottom panel and bulkhead #2 - now correct - was out of whack with the case that I had so carefully fit to the out-of-alignment surfaces!

The problem only showed up because I had clamped some cross pieces underneath ( you can just see them in the next pic) to give me something to push against when setting the case. Those cross pieces squared everything up nicely, of course, but now the case was all wrong - well not too wrong - just a few MM in fact, and the plane took care of it - but wrong enough.



After fixing it up, I proceeded to glue everything in place - quite a set-up if I do say so myself!



So a word to the wise - on a boat with a light plywood skin, beware of sag before you do a final fit!

Over the rest of the long weekend I installed the last bulkhead, put in all the stiffeners, made and installed the deck knees, beveled the sheer strake, put epoxy goop into all the little voids and gaps I could find, filleted here and there and generally cleaned everything up ready to coat the interior. Next are the mast steps and partners

I'll post more pics tonight.

- Norm

[Peter Malcolm Jardine]

Way cool Norm!!!

[outofthenorm]

Thanks Peter. It's been a fast, easy build. Here's some pics from today:

Daggerboard case is in and trimmed up. Plenty strong!



One of my ugly but effective fillets



One of the deck supports waiting its fillet



Test fitting the foredeck



A simple gadget for marking the nailing line.



A shot under the deck to check the fit



A good day. Tonight I'll cut the holes in the steps, tomorrow the inside gets its epoxy coat.

- Norm

[Boatmik]

Howdy,

This build demonstrates something that I felt very strongly when building the original Beth.

Particularly when upside down during the build I just couldn't get my confidence up.

Sometimes I really liked her look and other times, well, I remember saying "I wanted to hide her in the combustion stove" that was used to warm the workshop during that cold winter in 1989.

There was certainly a lot of interest from anyone who came to visit duckflat at the time too. They broke into two camps. A very divisive boat before it is decked and preferably with a mast or two up in the air. And then everyone started liking it more and more. And on the water where that boxy shape disappears and the sheer becomes the dominant line ...

Ends up looking something like this.



One important postscript ... Beth does require some skill to sail. Probably about the same level of skill required to sail a Laser in the same wind with a similar risk of receiving a dunking. Rather similar speeds too.



More Beth Sailing Canoe pics here

Best wishes
Michael Storer

[outofthenorm]

A few more pics. The interior structure is all done and epoxied. I primed it all tonight but ran out of light to take a picture.





- Norm

[JimD]

Great progress, Norm. Where will you be sailing her?

[outofthenorm]

Thanks Jim. I've joined a little daysailing club in Toronto's outer harbour, so I'll be sailing her there. Good winds, mostly flat water, and on a good day, there's the whole lake to play in. Have to watch out though - there's a trimaran club right next door, and those babies move fast. Just yesterday, one of them ran over my friend in his St Lawrence skiff. No injuries, but serious damage.

- Norm

[JimD]

How cold is that water, Norm?

[outofthenorm]

It was 60 degrees F this week. That's about average for late Summer. A lot colder in the Spring. I have a wetsuit I'll wear, and I think there will be a drysuit under the tree this Xmas.

- Norm

[outofthenorm]

Inside painted. Mast steps next - then decks!!!

- Norm

[outofthenorm]

Some Sunday afternoon progress - fitting and installing the mizzen step.

The step piece in 1" teak, rabbeted to fit against the stringer and bulkhead. Still some scraping to do first. The plywood base is a 1/2" piece epoxied to the bottom.


Step in position with holes pre-drilled for locating screws.


The mizzen partners and bulkhead with matching rabbets to increase gluing area and created a "locked" joint


Both pieces in position, ready for glue up. The vertical piece is just a spacer that lifts the partners into the right plane. The deck will be glued directly to the top piece after it's shaped to the deck camber.


- Norm

[outofthenorm]

Some detail work today. I had glued up the blank for the rudder a long time ago, and roughly shaped the dagger board - today was the day to get them ready to finish. Mik provides templates for shaping. I used my wood eraser (5 inch grinder with a 60-grit disk), a plane and spokeshave, then a RO sander. The wood is black cherry from a 4/4 plank that was given to me by a friend. Nice wood. I ripped the plank into narrow staves, flipped every other one and glued them up.

Rudder


Rudder foil shape at bottom


Dagger board


Both together


- Norm

[Ben Fleis]

Norm, this is excellent! I love reading and seeing people work in progress... Thank!

-b

[outofthenorm]

I've been posting this build on Mik Storer's Austrailian Boat Building Forum as well as here, and one of the members from Poland posted some questions. I thought that someone here might be interested. My responses are below.

Norm,
I can see differences between photographed details and plans:

* I can see only two pair of knees on those pictures (3 pair of knees on the plans)
* I can see more thick plywood for knees and bulkhaeds (6 mm ply on the plans)
* Additional aft cocpit bulkhaed (only 4 bulkheads on the plans)
* Additional four side stiffeners between bulkhaeds No 1 and 2 and two aft than bulkhaed No 5 (I can't see them on the plans)

What from differences in your boat? Is this new version of Beth or is this your version? How she will be in weight?

Robert

Hi Robert.

I can understand your confusion. I departed from the plans in a few ways - but don't think for a second that any changes were a criticism of Beth or of Mik!

The changes were mostly because I wanted to use materials I had on hand rather than buy new. Another reason is that I do not like working in epoxy, and that means you need bigger gluing surfaces. Those are the reasons my bulkheads and knees are thicker than the plans.

Knees and Bulkheads: As you noted, I added an additional bulkhead in place of the aft cockpit beam shown on the plans. Mik was OK with it, although he said in the future if someone wanted to do the same, they could probably eliminate the original BH #4 and make a box for the mizzen. Moving the bulkhead eliminated the need for the 3rd knee.

I added the bulkhead to do 3 things: make the cockpit smaller and therefore hold less water when swamped; to increase the size of the aft air tank; and reduce the area of unsupported floor.

You will also see that I combined the cockpit stiffener and the gusset into one piece and put it in the middle of the cockpit.

The extra hull stiffeners (riblets) were just a whim. Probably overkill.

I have not weighed the boat yet, but I think it will come in about 10-12 pounds (say 5 kilos) more than the ideal. But that's okay with me because I think the performance will still be spectacular. Besides: I'm not racing, and I recently lost 30 pounds of my own weight!

Regards

Norm

[outofthenorm]

Another weekend - and more progress. The decks are on at last!

View from fwd.


Test fit of coamings


view from aft. Mizzen is just stuck in for the fun of it.


Test fit of hatches. Needs more paint


Coaming are 1/2 in by 2 in WRC. It bent in cold with no issues.

[gregleeber]

I dont understand what keeps this boat from falling over when the wind blows???

[outofthenorm]

I dont understand what keeps this boat from falling over when the wind blows???

2 things:

- High initial stability thanks to the flat bottom, square side form.
- The crew (me) is ballast. She is sailed while sitting on the windward rail.

- Norm

[outofthenorm]

Hmmmmm. More than 1000 views and only a handful of comments. Can't figure out if I'm doing something right, or it's so wrong, you're all speechless.

- Norm

[David G]

Norm,

I've kept quiet, cause I've done my share of Storer cheerleading. I was the first American builder of one of his boats - the Goat Island Skiff. I absolutely love it. I've done so much promoting of the design that I'm now the approved builder for the West Coast (Ray @ Great Falls is the East Coast guy).

But you want comments. So, I'll say that I really like Beth a lot. Such a simple shape, and yet such beauty. Specialized, though. It's a GoFast sailing canoe that requires more sailing expertise and more constant attention than I can/want to bring to bear. I'd have to set my beer down, now, wouldn't I? I imagine she's a huge amount of fun, though. And did I mention gorgeous? I bet you'll be very pleased with her. My understanding is that she's gotten very good reviews from all that have built or sailed her.

Please do keep us appraised of progress, and titillated with fotos!


"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds, fast cars, and boats. The rest I just squandered" -- paraphrasing George Best

[kenjamin]

Norm,

I'm also one of the thousand enjoying the build and up until now, not saying much. Beth looks like a fun boat. I really like the simplicity of it and the fact that she keeps you on your toes when sailing her from what I've read. Keep up the good work and definitely post the sailing pictures when you get her done. What will you name her and what's her color scheme?? Again, thanks for the great pics.

kenjamin

[outofthenorm]

We're getting pretty close to launch time. On Friday I taped the deck/hull joint. This weekend I faired that in, then installed the rubrails, finished shaping the coamings, installed the airtank hatches, slathered everything in fairing compound, sanded (and sanded) and finally put on 2 coats of primer.

All sanded and faired, ready to prime


Coamings almost ready to finish.


Primer on - and her true shape is finally revealed





Next comes bonding in the mast tubes, installing the slave tiller and hanging the rudder. And some pretty paint of course.

- Norm

[outofthenorm]

Did some work today on the steering arrangements. The rudder has a yoke and a "slave" tiller (also with a yoke) that will be mounted just forward of the mizzen.

The blanks for the 2 yokes, dadoed to accept the rudder blade and the tiller. Both from 3/4 in cherry.


Holding the rudder and yoke in place just to get a feel for the size. It will look a lot slimmer when it's shaped.


The tiller and its yoke. The tiller is on old ash tiller I've had forever, cut down to serve here.


I just noticed that the tiller is the wrong way around on its yoke in these pictures. The yoke should point aft of course.

A lot of shaping and sanding ahead!

- Norm

[Tom Robb]

I expect that this is a dumb idea, but....
I'm not a hero dink racer, but I like the looks of Beth. I wonder if increasing the beam some (yes I know - find a different design) would tame her enough without spoiling her other obviously fine qualities?
Flame on guys.

[outofthenorm]

Tom, I was hoping someone who knows more about these things would answer, but I think you'd end up with a boat that just looked fatter and went slower. I had the same concerns originally and discussed with Mik the idea of fitting sponsons to the hull above the WL. He convinced me that it was a poor idea, adding complexity to the build, and changing the character of the immersed volume curve in a negative direction. Two of her virtues now are that the submerged volumes fore and aft remain more or less constant as she heels, and that there are no abrupt changes. Adding beam would increase the magnitude of the changes as she heels, likely creating more helm and slowing her down. As is, she remains balanced - although admittedly it's on a knife's edge. But isn't that where performance comes from? The other consideration is that her scantlings are also balanced with her stability - if she were stiffer, she'd need heavier masts and more structure. She's optimized for speed, at a cost of ultimate stability.

- Norm

[Tom Robb]

Norm,
I expect you're correct. The guy to ask is undoubtedly Storer.
It was just a thought.
Another obvious solution is learn to be a better sailor and reef in the meantime.
Tom

[outofthenorm]

Another obvious solution is learn to be a better sailor and reef in the meantime.
Tom

That's exactly my plan

[Peter Malcolm Jardine]

Great pics Norm!!!

[Rigadog]

Cool boat and a nice jog putting it all together. I have a question however: why doesn't the boat have a bit of flare in her sides for reserve stability?

[outofthenorm]

... why doesn't the boat have a bit of flare in her sides for reserve stability?

I think Mik's goal was to design the simplest high performance boat possible, so she follows the "box-boat" philosophy - straight stem and stern, straight sides and except for the deck, flat surfaces. Flare adds complexity - not much, to be sure, but more than absolutely needed. And it sure is simple to build.

- Norm

[Rigadog]

If I get going on a boat these pix will be helpful. Thanks for posting them.

[MiddleAgesMan]

The changes were mostly because I wanted to use materials I had on hand rather than buy new. Another reason is that I do not like working in epoxy...

Earlier you mentioned putting in epoxy fillets where needed so I assume the statement above means you used something other than epoxy for most of the construction bonding. What adhesive did you use?

Very nice work, BTW. I especially like the pictures of her faired and then primed.

[outofthenorm]

Thanks for the kind words Guys.

Adhesives- I used thickened epoxy for fillets and for any joint I could not back up with ringnails - things like the gussets that join the panels. I used fillets in some critical spots and used cleats almost everywhere. All other gluing - chine, hull/deck, bulkheads, partners and steps, bow and stern - is PL Premium backed with SB ringnails. The board and rudder were done with PL but the yokes and tiller were attached with epoxy.

I've tied to minimize the use of epoxy, putting it only where it was IMO the absolute right choice.

Rigadog - I think the only thing to say is pick a design and get to it! You'll never regret it.

Norm

[Rigadog]

Thanks for the encouragement.

[Boatmik]

I expect that this is a dumb idea, but....
I'm not a hero dink racer, but I like the looks of Beth. I wonder if increasing the beam some (yes I know - find a different design) would tame her enough without spoiling her other obviously fine qualities?
Flame on guys.

Howdy,

No flaming here ... it actually brings up a whole lot of the points I thought of when designing her. I asked myself the same question.

One of the main design objectives of BETH was to make her handleable on shore by one person.

I have spent a little bit of time sailing International Moths (because one of my friends was heavily involved and at another stage in my life I turned a tax refund cheque into a second hand Moth).

Moths are really light (maybe 60-70lbs including everything - fully rigged) but too bulky for one person to handle on shore. I knew I could handle a canoe on shore and on and off the car.

BEAM is the biggest single thing that makes boats hard to handle on shore.

I also knew (when I was younger) that I could get something about 70lbs from the roofrack to my shoulder and carry it some little distance. Those days are passed but the portability of Beth would be hugely reduced by more beam.

The other thing is I would suspect you would lose the easily driven quality of BETH. This is shown particularly in strong winds upwind. The waves don't slow the boat much even if the sails are well eased in the gusts

Beth has quite good light wind ability. If you increased the width by 10% (3 inches) you would need to increase the sail area the same amount to keep the ratio between sail and wetted area. She is 85 sq ft or thereabouts now ... and I don't think three inches would make that bigger difference but a sail area of 94 square feet might. Also a different boat as you say. (I am drawing up and one person expedition (maybe RAID) boat at the moment ... just about 4ft beam but no canoe stern. Square hull and a canoe stern - suspect it is a very draggy configuration as the boat gets wider.

If you want something more stable and ... heavier ... and ... slower ...

Finally, Beth is a great boat because she is different from everything else (I did use my huge backlog of stolen ideas - so nothing here is original) but still manages to "pull something off" in the looks department.


BETH reefed on Clayton Bay


Another BETH - this is the Mk2 that is in the plan. The other pics here are my original BETH


BETH 1000miles away from home (Wallis Lake, Forster/Tuncurry)

Reservoir of pics

Best wishes
Michael

[Boatmik]

Cool boat and a nice jog putting it all together. I have a question however: why doesn't the boat have a bit of flare in her sides for reserve stability?

Another great question.

Flare is one of those things that people mention a lot as a big criticism of squareboats (not you Rigadog).

I have the advantage of some basic hull design software which allows me to heel a boat model and the program will balance the boat for centre of buoyancy, pitch etc as it is heeled. It also tells me how much force is required to get the boat there.

With light boats there is negligible difference because the boat is heeling so far by the time the flare gets to the water it is a moot point.

Bolger is a really smart dude when he points out that reserve buoyancy is much more complex. The flare argument is terribly one dimensional. Some extra freeboard can give a lot of reserve stability, and that is the way I went with the Goat Island Skiff which is VERY high sided (not that you notice it until you step inside one) - but to make high sides useful you need to design a boat that will still steer at high angles of heel.

With BETH, here reserve stability comes from her side decks. you have to heel her an awful long way to get water in.

The other thing is that BETH was designed around the deckline I wanted ... my starting point were the American sailing canoes of the 1870s - something that is quite easy to see in sailing photos.

To get flare with the same beam and deckline the bottom of the boat would have to be narrowed. This would reduce initial stability and curiously enough it also reduces reserve stability as well.

That's something that advocates of flare don't point out! The flare argument makes some sense when comparing boats of similar form ... but promise you ... a inch of extra flare on a 600lb displacement (eg Goat Island Skiff with two adults and a dog aboard) boat makes no difference at all.

The REAL REASON for having flare is to reduce wetted surface in a boat of a particular beam - and that is the flaw of squareboats if they become too wide - they become sluggish in light winds, not to mention the pounding in strong. Smart designers keep them relatively narrow ... or the ultrasmart ones like Bolger make them long and narrow and cut off the ends so a long boat looks like a small one.

What a dude!!!

Best wishes
MIK

[Boatmik]

Tom, I was hoping someone who knows more about these things would answer, but I think you'd end up with a boat that just looked fatter and went slower. I had the same concerns originally and discussed with Mik the idea of fitting sponsons to the hull above the WL. He convinced me that it was a poor idea, adding complexity to the build, and changing the character of the immersed volume curve in a negative direction. Two of her virtues now are that the submerged volumes fore and aft remain more or less constant as she heels, and that there are no abrupt changes. Adding beam would increase the magnitude of the changes as she heels, likely creating more helm and slowing her down. As is, she remains balanced - although admittedly it's on a knife's edge. But isn't that where performance comes from? The other consideration is that her scantlings are also balanced with her stability - if she were stiffer, she'd need heavier masts and more structure. She's optimized for speed, at a cost of ultimate stability.

- Norm

Geez, Norm ... I had forgotten about this discussion. Your recap and extension of the argument is masterly!

One of the things I learned in my first sails is that the boat can heel and the rudder stall, but she keeps going straight. Try that with a modern racing dinghy!?!

Occasionally someone will contact me about using outrigger hulls or a leaning plank on BETH ... but I point out that the big risk is that they will just break the mast/s if they get out in a bit of breeze.

MIK

[outofthenorm]

Thanks Mik. I got sidelined this week by 3 "W"s - work, weather, and what the heck is that pain in my gut and why won't it go away? (I guess that's 4 "w"s) Happily, all W's have passed for the moment and the weekend (look, another W!) will see some progress. I did manage to shape and varnish the rudder , tiller and board (6 coats), and get the last coats of fairing compound and primer on the boat. I've also sorted out the tiller mounting, mast tubes and various other details. I think I'm about a week from launch (fingers crossed). More pictures soon.

- Norm

[Brumenschenkel]

Nice looking boat, and great concept. I was just considering this design the other day after having my canoe yawl interest peaked by a thread in the design section.
A couple of questions, is that all marine plywood you are using or did you only use it o the hull ? Secondly can the flotation chambers be used for storing camping gear for those who might want to cruise, or are they to tight and would this compromise their buoyancy. Oh yeah and how does she paddle!

[outofthenorm]

Thanks B. I used marine ply for some bulkheads and the knees, but just 1/4 inch waterproof GIS ply for everything else. I cherry-picked the best sheets from the pile and coated with epoxy, primer and paint. I've put 8 inch 1/4 turn hatches in the watertight bulkheads for access - so yes, you could store anything that would fit through those. Don't know about the handling ... soon come.

- Norm

[Tom Robb]

Well!
Ask a dumb question and get an intellegent answer. Who woudda thunk it?
My own more thought out answer still seems to me to work - reef when you must and learn to be a better sailor.

[Boatmik]

Howdy Tom,

Sometimes it is the dumb questions that are the most revealing! I owe a lot to the dumb questions I have received (and asked!) over the years.

Howdy Brumentschenkel,

How does she paddle?

Not well enough for a real paddling aficionado to be happy, but in flat water and no wind (or very light and slightly favourable) I have covered quite big distances.

Sometimes if there is a crosswind I drop a bit of centreboard. I kneel and paddle and the tiller is in about the right position for me to control it with a buttock (A multi talented sailor me!)

Also in more wind I have used the paddle to get into tight areas after dropping the sail.

If there is more wind and distance ... you should (or could) be sailing and eating up the miles!

MIK

[RFNK]

MIK
I've only just come across this thread. Beth reminds me of the International Canoe Championships that were held out the front of our place on Port Stephens a few years ago. I'm not sure if they were the world championships or the national championships - these boats are not common! Anyway, they have a much taller and I expect more powerful rig than Beth and a rather large banana board. They seemed to be perfectly designed to combine quite high speed with lots of swimming (along similar lines to those sailboarders who value high speed but jump in at each end to turn instead of learning to gybe). It seemed to me that gybing an IC in high wind is a black art known to, probably, no one! Here's the link to the IC website - have a look at the `honour roll' and you'll get an idea of the size of this class!) http://www.canoe.org.au/default.asp?...2F78%2F1802%2F

Is Beth really manageable in wind over 15 knots? Would some sort of trapeze (guess not) or banana board be a practical addition? Regards, Rick

[Boatmik]

Howdy Rick,

I have quite often had her out in 25+. (I know my windspeeds too because of racing). Much easier to handle than a Laser in those conditions.

Just as fast upwind (the waves don't slow her as much as a laser so you can relax more) and broad reaching (she is a bit faster and much easier to control faster might be because of the control. This include gybing). Beam reaching is a bit slower because of less righting moment.

A leaning plank or trapeze would be the obvious way to solve that problem but would add a lot of complication and expense. If someone just added one they would break the mast.

There is a full discussion about this exact topic at the bottom of this page
http://www.storerboatplans.com/Beth/beth.html

Through the same page is a discussion of general performance and some interesting things about gybing a balanced lug rig (heaps easier and safer) compared to a conventional rig - and why it feels completely different.

But point is ... in stronger winds ... someone who feels comfortable in a Laser can have a hoot in BETH.

Best wishes
Michael Storer

[RFNK]

Thanks Michael! That's really quite amazing to me - you've got a great looking design and if it can handle that wind range, you're to be congratulated. I shouldn't have been so lazy. I should have done a bit more searching around before putting these questions up - thanks for the prompt response! I'll check out the web link etc.

Are you familiar with the IC? I'd be interested in your opinion of them. I think they're a pretty eccentric old design (I like eccentric old designs!) but they really seem difficult to manage to me. I haven't sailed one, although I'd love to some day. I'd also like to see Beth sailing. Do you know where in Oz I'd be able to see one in action? Regards, Rick

[RFNK]

Hope I'm not boring everyone with this ... I just did a bit more looking and found this quote on the IC website:

The 1996 world championship was held on Port Stephens, NSW Australia, in September.The week''s weather was quite atypical.After a fine breeze for the invitation race, the next day saw a 30 knot westerly.On Subsequent days westerly gales blew twice scattering the fleet.Luckily for Welshman, Robin Wood, the ultimate winner, six heats were run allowing him to drop a disastrous DNF and claim the trophy.The three best Australians placed 5th., 12th., & 20th.

I'm not quite sure how they managed to get a 20th place though as I don't remember seeing more than a few boats there (that would have more to do with my memory and powers of observation than the accuracy of the ICA's records though, let me say!). I don't understand why they think a 30 knot westerly in September is unusual though!! Anyway, maybe this will interest the Bethists! Regards, Rick

[Boatmik]

The International Canoe is just fantastic in almost every way. A huge tradition of design and innovation ... modern boats would not be the way they are without the influence of the racing canoe.

They had leaning planks around 1880, fully battened sails in the 1870s. Many of the tricky quick release cleats we see today were developed by the canoes. Truly lightweight hollow masts (spiral wound wood veneer) in the 1890s.

You have to remember too that in the 1870s it would have been one of the very fastest ways a human contrivance could move on this planet. People thought you would be sucked out of train carriages by the wind at 20mph ... canoes had been touching these speeds for a long time.

When they had races to work out what should be the high performance interational singlehander a whole bunch of modern designers did their best but were beaten so completely by the canoe it was laughable. Even more interesting was that the canoe at that time had a very stable design since about 1950 but trounced the "modern" 1970s monohulls. There were 7 races. The results were 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.

The canoe wasn't chosen because it is regulated by the ICA (the International Canoeing Assoc) rather than the then IYRU (International Yacht Racing Union). "not one of theirs". Perhaps this has some resonance with the Tornado Catamaran being dropped from the next Olympics (by the same body renamed) which most monohull racers and every cat sailor thinks is the dumbest decision made in decades.

To sail ... an IC has a feeling of effortless power and amazing grace and smoothess. Acceleration is instant. I've sailed one a couple of times and it is really fascinating to try and work out how to modify skills to fit the boat and make everything work as smooth as silk.

Weak point of the IC used to be running and broad reaching but they now allow spinnakers and also have unfrozen the development. I think the spinnakers are a mistake and will eventually be bad for the class. All classes make the mistake they have to be faster than others ... which is why so many classes have increased spinnaker areas or done some modding in recent years ... they don't realise that people START sailing in a class because it is local and they like it enough.

Or for the canoe ... people get started because they are mesmerised by the package that is the boat. Now with the kite it is also more expensive and more complex for people starting out. A weak point shared between the IC and most of the conventional racing classes. 50% of the cost of a modern racing dinghy is to get an extra 3% of speed over the same boat from three decades ago and the boats in the current fleet still have all similar speed. Anyone can see it is dumb and that every class must price itself out of the market - or has - as participation drops. A common boat for a couple of kids here is $7500 (or was last year) or a top level 505 is pushing $30,000.

This is the other reason BETH has no leaning plank. Also Beth has six blocks (pulleys - $8 ea) which can be plain sheaves so cheap in comparison to the 25 or so ball bearing ones ($25 ea) on an IC. Performance is not the same either of course. Beth at Laser speeds and the IC going 50% faster.

But nice to be able to pass a laser on a broad reach often enough in a boat 75% cheaper, or burn off half the Laser fleet upwind by picking the shifts better! Racing against other "character boats" ... ha. Funnily enough the Goat Island skiff is faster, but not as thrilling.

MIK

[Dryfeet]

Okay, so given my propensity to just change a 'few' things whenever I look at a boat design I like, I've got a couple questions.

Suppose you just doubled the dimensions?

(I know, I know, no longer small, light, cheap, etc, etc, but humor me)

This boat reminds me of a Hunt 110/210, which always caught my eye. It's good looking from every angle. So, at 31' would the increase in size and resultant stability compensate for the decrease in crew weight vs overall displacement?

Should it then have a ballasted fin instead?

Given that displacement increases as a cube and sail area as a square would it/should it have a commensurate increase (proportionally) in sail area? or would a straight squaring of sail area be the best way to handle the reduced crew weight? (essentially taming it a bit, but still having a good SA/D ratio)

[Boatmik]

Howdy Dryfeet.

The 110 class was one of the many design components that made Beth the way she is and why I stuck to the direction I had chosen. There is just too much evidence to show that squareboats can be both quick and seaworthy.

If you double the dimensions you do end up with close to a 32 footer that is just over 5ft wide.

You will need to find a chap 11ft tall weighing in at about 1120lbs to keep her 330 sq ft of sail upright. A keel will not be as effective at that weight because the boat has to heel to 90 degrees for it to be as effective as a giant bloke/blokette. He/she will be able to heel the bigger Beth in light wind for a similar wetted surface reduction (as a percentage) as the original Beth.

Mast might have to be a bit heavier as stability will increase sixteenfold.

The scale shift is so huge that comparisons are generally meaningless.

You can work through the calculations here
http://www.steelboatbuilder.com/tech5.html

Or Ted Brewer has some nice stuff here.
http://www.tedbrewer.com/yachtdesign.html

If you compare the original Beth with the expanded one you will find that most ratios are pretty similar except some things move so far out of range that you can see it is impractical to compare the two boats ... this is the point the 11ft bloke or blokette is here to demonstrate.

What about a doubling of Righting Moment (two person crew - what are the options for changing the boat). Keep the change parameters sensible and you get some interesting results - better than making too big a change and seeing the example break down like above .. and way more educational. Another way is to download some basic software and play and see what numbers you can hit. Google Hullform or plyboats or freeship

Best wishes
Michael Storer

[outofthenorm]

Suppose you just doubled the dimensions?

I think you might end up roughly here . Then you'd need to round up 11 or 12 big friends whenever you wanted to go sailing.


Chesepeake log canoe with 11 guys on the board.

[Dryfeet]

Guys, thanks for the replies. I'm still in the process of working out the relationship with our VLD (very large dude) versus the 16 fold increase in stability. With that large a stability increase, do you still need that VLD? The displacement increase would have to add the proportionate weight of the VLD just to keep her on her new lines but theoretically the RM of the VLD wouldn't need to be as 'signficiant'??? No?

When moving from a small boat to a larger boat, the crew weight would seem to me to be a number to include in the displacement rather than as an add on. The new boat would need to have a near 2000# displacement sans crew.

It appears to me that the SA/D remains unchanged with a pure scale up and perhaps that's the real tell here. It would remain an overpowered boat unless the rig was reduced here despite the 16 fold increase in stability. I could still be tempted though.....

This is still the best looking square boat I've ever seen. I'll stop the hijack, thanks Norm for sharing your project. Most excellent.