Originally Posted by PCP
The actual Bounty had about the double of the displacement of the original Bounty.
I think that given that difference in displacement it does not make sense to say that the original plans were followed because the scantlings would have to be different.
If the original scantlings were followed on a ship with a two times the original displacement ...well, then something was very wrong.
Saying this I don't know about the design of this Bounty. I suppose that a naval architect was responsible for that alteration but I never heard nothing about who was or about his competence to do the job.
Anyway I don't see the point in discussing this. Even if the Bounty was a very well built boat, it was still basically a XVIII century designed wooden ship, with limitations that had to do with the 3 centuries old design and the building materials. In any case that boat would not safe sailing an hurricane, so what's the point?
Here are all information about the Bounty and the Bounty replica:
HMS Bounty, Replica
HMS Bounty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I agree with what you say.
My post is really to simply answer the posting(s) of those who still want to supply false statements like the Bounty was a movie prop. What happened is aggregious enough with adding in a piece of flase information which may cause some...maybe even a newbie to imagine that they were sailing away in a cardboard model that was to be burned and had no value.
Also the original design was changed. Of course most knwledgeable know that will change the saiing characteristic of the vessel. Thats why I am hoping this is gone over in the inquirey. It may have contributed to making the Bounty unmanageable in some conditions. This would be a good lesson to learn for the futire so this mistake is not made again also. I amstill going through my posts as I distinctly rememebr a gentleman who oposted about righting moments and inspectuions of vessels. He in fact had something to do with testimony on a vessel and was a lifetime naval archetecht.