This makes my point exactly. Kasten claims the method CANT be used for keel ,skeg, rudder, decks, cabin, etc. while I on the origami site, in my book and in Alex's video, you can see the keels, rudder, cabin, decks, wheelhouse etc. , being built using origami methods, something we have been doing since hull number one, back in 1979 . Anyone reading this site can confirm that, by checking the photos on the origami boats site. Kasten has been told this, and has full access to the origami boats site, yet continues to spread the bull, and disinformation. So how can anyone believe anything else he has to say on the subject? He stubbornly refuses to educate himself on the subject, while spreading bull, not the kind of guy one should rely on for any steel boat building information.
I think your disagreement with Kasten is largely semantics. As I was reading Kasten's piece, Kasten seems to be defining folded plate construction differently than Origami in that he saw Origami as implying that the entire hull shape was formed from plates that were partially attached and that the hull gained its form solely from the shape of the edges of gores. Using his definitions, when I look at the photos of your boats, it appears that the keels are constructed using what he terms folded plate construction in which the plates are shaped around the keel bottom and tank bulheads rather than as would be the case in his def of Origami where the shapes are formed solely by the shape of the edges of the plate.
The weight of the 1/8th inch plate on my decks cabinsides and cabin top are exactly the same as the weight of the same thickness on a Dix design, or a Whithotz, or a Roberts, or a Tanton, or a Colvin or a Van de Stadt, etc. etc. They don't have a secret source of lighter per sq ft steel!
I cannot speak for the other designers, but at least the designs of Charlie Wittholz that I worked on for Charlie did not have steel decks. Charlie preferred wood decks and houses since they were lighter in weight. He would detail the stanchions so that they were hung on the bulkwarks to avoid leaks. But otherwise his boats were designed with glass over wood decks. Charlie's topsides were generally 1/8" plate on boats the size of yours but his boats had a lot more framing.
Thank you for the correction on your mast material. I did not realize that you were not using structural sections for your masts. To set the record straight from my comments yesterday, 6" diameter x 11 ga. ERW tubing varies in weight from manufacturer to manufacturer but generally weighs around 7.5 to 8.2 lbs per foot. The trapped air would provide 11.4 lbs of buoyancy per foot so if the mast did not fail there would be 3-4 lbs of buoyancy per foot. Just for comparason a 7" dia x 1/8" wall aluminum tube has similar I*E and S*F properties and would weigh around 3.25 Lbs, but would require a 1" larger diameter and thicker walls to equal the 6" dia x 11ga steel.