SailNet Community banner
  • SailNet is a forum community dedicated to Sailing enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about sailing, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, repairs, reviews, maintenance, and more!

Bob Perry's take on Wolfenzee's dream boat

187K views 1K replies 48 participants last post by  Rhapsody-NS27 
#1 · (Edited)
In the "Modern Hull forms and Motion Comfort" thread,

Post # 142, Wolfenzee said to Bob Perry " BOB: take a close look at the lines of my boat and tell me could a fin keel have been designed in relatively easily http://atkinboatplans.com/Sail/images/CaptainCicero-3.gif
[/I]"

And in Post #152 and #153 Bob Perry Responded:
(#152)"Damn it Wolfer!
You made me think.
I hate it when that happens.

Sure I could do your boat with a fin keel and a nice skeg hung rudder or better yet a spade rudder.

It would look just like your boat....above the water. Under the water you would not recognize it. I would have to shave away all that deadrise and reduce displ while carving away some volume forward and reducing some hollows aft.

But in the end you and me would love it. It would be a WOLF in sheep's clothing like NIGHT RUNNER."


(#153) "Wolfy:
Next Wednesday post your hull lines again and a photo or two of your boat.
When I start thinking about a new boat I need to see it and I think it would be fun for all of us to see what your boat would look like with a more modern hull combined with that traditional Atkin look.

I have to do this to get it off my mind. I'm built like that.

Or, Jeff could do it. I know he could.
Or, Jeff and I could do it together.
He'd do the hard work and I'd do the pointing and gesturing.

Either way let's see if we can produce a boat that will get your juices flowing."


And I am bowled over by that.

As a SailNet Moderator, I can only thank Bob Perry for that generous offer to come up with a design that explores Wolf's question. That is a true gift to this forum. Normal folk rarely get to see a custom design process and so this should prove interesting.

And I am truly honored that you would be willing to do this with me. I truly appreciate Bob's willingness to give that a try.

This is a thread for that process. I am excited to see where this ends up....

Jeff
 
See less See more
#826 ·
Alex:
No. The SLIVER will live on Bainbridge Island on the dock in front of the owner's house. But the boat will be at CSR on the Canal for some time while it is being outfitted, rigged and finished. You could stop by and take a look anytime.

I don't fault Wolf for the 183 degree limit of positive stability mistake. He's just a boat owner and I don't expect boat owners to be experts on stability numbers. But Brent entertained the idea and commented on it. I would expect someone calling himself a yacht designer to be familiar enough with stability figures to know immedietely that there can be no such thing as 183 degrees of positive stability. Of course he blows it off now but if you go back and read the exchange I think it speaks for itself.

My point is this: If someone is going to put forward ideas on the elements of yacht design they need some credibility to establish they are expert in the field.
 
#830 ·
Sounds sort of like me, I have aquired all sorts of stuff for little or nothing, not have go and get rid of lots of valuable stuff...I have to keep reminding myself of how much it actuially cost me. I did buy radar, only because it was really cheap, I can't get around to installing it so will get rid of it....it's used value is $750-$950, but I paid $125....I have already given away $1000 worth of power tools (which cost me $200)....but just out of principle I want to sell the Radar.
I like doing favors for people, if they return the favor, great, if not, no problem. Also I have profited more out of trading stuff than if I had sold it.
 
#835 ·
Brent;
Pleease don't send any of your nit whits to me. If they came to you initially there is no way in hell they are going to be people I would ever work with. But given the well documented navigational efforts and groundings of your clients you seem to have plenty of nit whits already so a few more can't hurt. I'm sure there are rocks yet to hit and ice fields yet to plow.
 
#932 ·
I'd consider a nit Whit someone who would pay a designer who has zero hands on experience in building in steel, who has never got his hands dirty building a steel boat, nor crossing an ocean in a steel boat, nor maintained one for any length of time , but goes by hearsay and old wives tales about steel boats, mostly propagated by those who are trying to sell them something else.
 
#836 ·
I just had a flash.Maybe we are looking at this all wrong.We spend alot of energy avoiding reefs and ledges,containers etc.Maybe we should design our boats to intentionaly hit rocks!.It would give yacht racing a whole new flavor and excitement.Like combining a monster truck rally with the Rolex big boat series.Start by samshing into the breakwater at the St Francis yacht club,then bash into Alcatraz.then the south tower of the golden gate bridge then a fast run down to smash into Treasure Island!,whatta ya think?
 
#842 ·
The rules would definitely need to be rewritten since hitting a rounding mark means that you need to reround the mark. If the SI's said that 'rounding' now means 'hitting' the mark, without a change in the rules, would rerounding meaning going back and hitting it again? That could get really ugly!

Jeff
 
#837 · (Edited)
Jak:
I think you have hit (no pun intended) on a great new way to organize a race course.

First leg: Hit the rock off the Ladies Ledge.
second leg:Hit the rock of Halibut Point.
Third leg: hit the rock off Dumb ****s Rock.

The race committee would have to have the boat hauled and checked for approptriate marks to verify roundings.

In the winter time we coud have the Ice Plow regatta.
 
#840 ·
Fixed it: :D

Jak:
I think you have hit (no pun intended) on a great new way to organize a race course.

First leg: Hit the rock off the Ladies Ledge.
second leg:Hit the rock of Halibut Point.
Third leg: hit the rock off Dumb ****s Rock.

The race committee would have to have the boat hauled and checked for approptriate marks to verify groundings.

In the winter time we coud have the Ice Plow regatta.
 
#839 ·
so it IS OK to hit blakely rock on the way around her! wow, not so sure she would like getting hit by 130 someodd boats going around her. Or what about poor old fastnet rock, a 1000 or so boats over a day or two or three.......might take awhile for those poor things to heel!

I think I will stick to missing them thar rocks......

SO which boat at csr is sliver? I was over there twice yesterday, might be by there tomorrow.....need to check up on all them boats in the yard that hit rocks........like glory doing the van-isle.......survived just fine being anything but a steel hull!.....

Marty
 
#845 ·
"Bear in mind that this is the guy who considered it "Bad Seamanship " to give up a quarter knot for safety and strength! "

Come on Brent you are still making stuff up. Show me exactly where I said that. Your argument for steel is fine but your habit of inventing quotes from other people is just plain dishonest, if that means anything to you. I'd give you another crock but I can't find one big enough for all your BS.

This weekend a fleet of fragile and scary fiberglass boats will rendezvous at my beach shack for our big 2nd annual Spike Memorial Sail In. We have sailors coming from BC in their fragile grp cruising boats. I sure hope that make it and do not disintegrate on the way down. This is not invented BS. This is what is really happening. I will take some photos.
 
#846 · (Edited)
Bob
It was in this thread where you said you consider it bad seamanship to not try to get the last quarter knot out of a boat, at all costs. Dont have time to hunt it down.
A 303 british will shoot thru 23 inches of douglas fir, weight 69 lbs per sq ft, dry, much heavier wet.. You can see that stump in Von Donop inlet, just west of the lagoon. It will barely shoot thru 3/8th inch mild steel plate, and only if solidly supported, weight 15 lbs per sq foot. Or, if you have a freind with a 303 or 308, same energy, you can try it yourself. And you say the wood is stronger? Now thats making stuff up! That takes a bit of self delusion to believe.
Haven't tried ballistics on Fibreglass . If you try it, let us know how you make out.
Jimmy Cornells book "Modern Ocean Cruising"" interviews cricumnavigators, 8 out of 10 who said they would choose a metal boat for their next boat. Several had already started metal boats ,at the time of writing. Thats a lot of ocean cruising expereince. One can call oneself a designer without ever having set foot on a boat, some do. So tell us of your extensive experience in cruising for long terms, and crossing oceans, before you first began calling yourself a designer ;Bob, Jeff?
The biggest hurdles most wanabe cruisers face are time and money, which most designers ignore competely. And they wonder why their buiness is slowing down? Should we trust their judgement on other matters? So can you give us a rundown on all the many ways you have offered to reduce the amount of time and money cruisers need to get off the treadmill, and out cruising ;Bob, Jeff?
The first 36 I built pounded on a Baja lee shore in 8 to12 ft surf for 16 days, and was pulled off thru 12 ft surf ,lifted and dropped on every wave for 1/4 mile. A wood or fibreglass boat would have broken up in minutes, but you say they are stronger than steel? Now thats making stuff up. THe sistership to Moitessiers Joshua ," Trismus" was blown ashore on Rangiroa and abandoned in 1975. Ten years later she was pulled off intact and used for shipping coconuts around. Would a wood or fibreglas boat have survived that long? And you say wood and fibreglass are stronger? Now thats making stuff up. Better hang onto your crock Bob. You are gonna need it, more than anyone else here.
You claim that cruisers dodging Fukashima debris would be better of on a boat which would have broken up quickly in those conditions? Now thats making stuff up! Wood is the weakest, most problem prone material ever used for a boat.
Someone on the origamiboats site mentioned someone who was bragging about taking 6 weeks to get a 35 ft Roberts pre cut shell together, something I have done in a week. Could the comparatively horrendously complicated building methods used in the Roberts have something to do with it? I have even had people claim that the 180 feet of chine weld on them takes no longer to cut, grind, fit, and weld than the 28 feet of chine on my 36. Now thats making stuff up!
Jeff claims that if he makes a big fibreglass hammer it can pound thru 3/16th plate more easily than a steel hammer of the same weight? Now thats making stuff up!
Yes fibreglass boats are cheap. I have encouraged people getting into cruising, to buy one to get some expeerince on one, knowing full well that they wil eventually want one of my steel boats . One just built a 36 and his fibreglass boat will soon be up for sale. Others are dreaming of owning one of my boats .One plans to upgrade form a Roberts to one of mine this fall. All the fibreglass boats have deck leaks. They are giving them away for good reason. Their designers have fallen on hard times lately. I have been turning down a lot of work lately, more than I could ever do.
Yes, when you know that you can hit most rocks without any serious damage, or ,in most cases zero damage, you tend to get a bit careless, but why would you worry about it anyway? Do you consider it good seamanship, and thus "Wise" to choose a boat which would sink in those circumstances? Seamanship begins with the choice of boat.
And you claim that a boat which can survive such incidents undamaged, is a poor choice, or not as strong as a boat which would suffer severe damage in the same incident? Now thats making stuff up! Go get your crock,Bob!
The last two trips I made home from Tonga to BC took 23 days from Hawaii, beating into strong trade winds for the first half , not exactly poor windward performance for a heavily loaded 31 footer, with all I own on board.

PS. Have you tried wooden rigging wire? Why not ,if you believe it is stronger?
 
#847 ·
Brent: I don't know any other way to put this but you are a liar. If that is hard to understand I'll say it again. You Brent, are a liar.

Again: Brent Swain, you are a liar. You make stuff up.

You will have to show me the exact post where I said "at all costs". That is stupid. I would never say something lie that. And by making it up you look very silly and defeated. I do believe that a good sailor strives at all times to get the very best performance out of bhis boat and that is "good seamanship". But certianly not "at all costs". Are you really nuts?

The problem we have here is that you are so hyper defensive about your steel boats that you will go to any end to justify them and in doing so you look like a fool. You don't need to. You have some OK boats and you have a very clever and effective building method. I applaud you for that. Well done there Brenty boy.

But we have some serious disconnects.
Let's begin with, "Come on boys, let's go out and shoot us some yachts. Yahooooo!

No, I am not going to shoot my boats. I am not going to strangle my boats. I am in no way going to try any MMA moves on them. And dynomite is out. Any nuclear device is certainly out. I suppose given the nit wits you deal with that anything is possible but my clients are intelligent people who seldom if ever try to shoot their boat with any kind of gun.

I have a bunch of boats showing up here this weekend. It's a big party. Maybe I should set up a sand bag on my railing, get my stool and my rifle and plunk them as they come alongside. I mean, just to see what would happen.

I think I have it. You have run out of all logical arguments so you are going to try to invent a new one. Guns vs boats! That's very Swainy.

You crack me up. You are kind of like one of those Sunday morning TV evangelists, except I bet your hair is bad.

I'm here almost all the time Brent. If you would like a one on one and a discussion about truth come on down.
 
#848 ·
As I suggested in the wooden mast discussion, I soaked a bit of fir in a very salty brine for a week, dried it out then glued it together with epoxy. The salt had zero effect on the strength of the glue line, that I could detect. Commercially available wood preservatives leave an oily surface, which no glue can stick to.
 
#853 ·
That quote summarizes your approach. Based on a highly unscientific one off test (no empirical data), and what fir, grown where, how old, salt solution for how long, penetration through material, breaking strength, glue, drying time, etc.

Based on this myth You'll probably start arguing that this is the only safe way to build wooden masts - I sincerely believe You're dangerous to your clients, as you have demonstrated here that you have NO (Nil, zero) understanding of material strength but subscribe to the "I hit it with a hammer so it must be strong" theory.
"The salt had zero effect on the strength of the glue line, that I could detect.", funny.

Sorry that I'm bashing you too, but this is plain stupid..

/Joms
 
#849 ·
Bob
I never suggested you shoot any boat. I suggest you go out to a remote place and try a shot at a 23 inch diameter fir log, then try it on a piece of 3/8th inch mild steel plate, and compare the two for impact resistance, similar to the impact of a sharp rock, then determine who is the liar when stating that wood is stronger. ( reality vs numbers jugling)
Yes. I believe that my boats are far superior to stock plastic and wood boats for full time cruising.
No, I dont believe one should give preference to a designer who doesn't believe strongly in what he is designing.
Yes, I would like to read of your vast ocean cruising expereince, which you had before you began designing for others ( or since for that matter). I notice you make no comment on that. Wonder why?
Caught a good Southeasterly in here, waiting for a good northwesterly to get me to the good swimmin on Cortes. No, I dont spend my time in an urban office. I spend it out cruising, in the real world. Keeps a guy in reality, away from the fantasy land of number jugling.
Heat wave forecast. Wunnerful!
 
#862 · (Edited)
Another classic. This assumes that since you personally do not understand the science, the science must be "juggled". But even debating on the gut reaction level of go out and shoot something, I will go back to points raised in earlier discussions on this topic.

As I have said before, if the prime criteria for selecting a material for a one-off, custom built boat is low cost, speed of construction and impact resistance steel is not a bad way to go, but if you factor in inherent hull weight, then there are better ways to go.

Take impact resistance for example, you use the example of shooting bullets at steel vs wood. To begin with, in the hull construction examples that I have cited in past discussions, the wooden construction would have a Kevlar sheathing. Kevlar has come down in price so in earlier discussions I have shown that you could, buy the plywood, Kevlar laminate and epoxy resin to build a hull deck and much of the interior for less than the cost of steel hull in one of your boats.

When it comes to impact resistance, as I have also shown in the past discussions,there is a pretty big difference between a high speed, small area impact like a bullet vs a slow speed impact like a sailboat hitting a rock ledge. In the case of a high speed projectile, Kevlar has become the standard armor material, replacing steel in helmets,body armor,and vehicles offering a combination of better stopping power and much lighter weight. And this selection of kevlar by the military is by group whose methods of testing and real life experience is far more rigouous and percise that plinking at random pieces of steel and old stumps in the wilderness.

In fairness, steel does do much better in low speed impact where it does a good job distributing the impact to a larger area than it does in a high speed projectile style impact. But even in low speed impacts, Kevlar composites or kevlar over wood composites still offer better puncture resistance when compared by weight.

And while you may not care about the relative weight of your hulls, to me any hull weight savings can be used for some mix of being able to carry more supplies and extend range, or more ballast and increse stability, or reduce weight to allow better performance.

As I have also pointed out, the composite skin could be continuous to avoid leaks. I mentioned an acquaintance who developed a technique for blind fastening fittings without having a fastening opening for water to penetrate.

But lastly there is no reason that a custom boat builder can't cherry pick ideas, doing a composite hull with custom fabricated fittings made from scavanged or salvaged materials in much the same way that you also advocate.

What you are getting called out on in this discussion is the all or nothing approach you advocate, and you unwillingness to address the specifics of these types of discussions, instead putting forth asymmetric arguments that sound good but which do not make sense when compared on a more even balanced analysis.

Respectfully,
Jeff
 
#850 · (Edited)
Did you learn to lie while you were out cruising Brent?
You are very good at it.
Please address your lie first. Then we can proceed.
As it stand now, you lie.

You might choose to look at numbers of boats out cruising the world.
I beat you many times over and over and over. And I do it with nice looking boats.

How about this:
You post a photo of your very best , most beautiful "yacht" that has ever sailed around the Horn and I will do the same. I'll post , maybe a few, no that's not fair. I'll pick one boat that has sailed aroun the Horn.

I'm terrible. I'll kick your bacon all over the Salish Sea.
I'm a bad man.
 
#851 ·
Brent,

Did you know destroyers in the US navy fleet only have 3/8" thick steel, so while they are in the lead of a carrier fleet, if they are torpedo'd, the torpedo goes thru it with out exploding! Meanwhile the battle and carrier ships have thicker steel. BUT, a torpedo will explode and sink them! The US navy in WWII lost more destroyers due to typhoons than torpedo's! So having a frame that is not to strong or thick etc, might be an advantage at times. Also why PT boats were made of wood. Lighter, just as strong per say, but a torpedo would go thru them, potentially allowing said boat to get to the sub and destroy it!

So one can have, many types of materials to make a boat per say, sometimes the strength of it, as you imply by whether or not a bullet will go thru stop or equal, may be to either it advantage, or disadvantage. That fir would not explode a bullet, so you only have a round hole in hull to deal with, the steel on the other hand, would explode the bullet, sinking the steel boat!

Take that for what it is worth!

Marty
 
#952 ·
Brent,

Did you know destroyers in the US navy fleet only have 3/8" thick steel, so while they are in the lead of a carrier fleet, if they are torpedo'd, the torpedo goes thru it with out exploding! Meanwhile the battle and carrier ships have thicker steel. BUT, a torpedo will explode and sink them! The US navy in WWII lost more destroyers due to typhoons than torpedo's! So having a frame that is not to strong or thick etc, might be an advantage at times. Also why PT boats were made of wood. Lighter, just as strong per say, but a torpedo would go thru them, potentially allowing said boat to get to the sub and destroy it!

So one can have, many types of materials to make a boat per say, sometimes the strength of it, as you imply by whether or not a bullet will go thru stop or equal, may be to either it advantage, or disadvantage. That fir would not explode a bullet, so you only have a round hole in hull to deal with, the steel on the other hand, would explode the bullet, sinking the steel boat!

Take that for what it is worth!

Marty
I just measured the hole in 3/8th plate made by a 30 calibre bullet. It measured 48 calibre, not exactly exploding the bullet, and not making a significantly bigger hole, when I have seen them expand at least as much, or more in wood.
I wouldn't put much faith in the math skills or judgement of anyone who believes that the energy needed to push a 180 grain projectile hard enough to go thru 23 inches of fir, can be contained in a wooden barrel. I saw a 3 inch shell hole in a sunken tug at Fanning Island thru the iron prop. Anyone there can dive on it, just off the village. You couldn't get that kind of energy from a wooden barrel.
It just shows how ludicrous the comments about the strength of wood made here really are.
 
#856 ·
Fact is that Uniflyte did a bunch of bullet proof tests back before they built the Valiants. The testing is well documented and was done in conjunction with their building the Viet Nam river gunboats.

I'm still not going to shoot any boats with my 50 cal.
I might take a whack ot two today at some with my Don Bradley cricket bat.
 
#860 ·
Fact is that Uniflyte did a bunch of bullet proof tests back before they built the Valiants. The testing is well documented and was done in conjunction with their building the Viet Nam river gunboats.

I'm still not going to shoot any boats with my 50 cal.
I might take a whack ot two today at some with my Don Bradley cricket bat.
Bradman. :p

You've been away too long BP.
 
#861 ·
Fuzzy one:
Yeah, I was corrected on that last night by one pf the people at the Spike Sail In. Funny thing is that Don Bradman didn't sound right at all. Don Bradley sounded fine.

Been gone now 56 years.

We had a great get together this weekend in honor of Spike. Probably around 30 sailors showed up. We had four fragile and dangerous GRP boats on moorings in from of my beach shack. I did not shoot at any boats. Some people drove up. We had a big dinner with two BBQ's going and ended the evening playing music well into the night.
 

Attachments

#869 ·
That's OK Maestro, Bradman doesn't sound right to me either, he never did. Great batsman but other than that a wrong'un .... my opinion only.
 
#863 · (Edited)
Brent:
Check out this list:
OIlin Stephens
Phil Rhodes
John Alden
German Frers
Bruce Farr
Bill Lapworth
Gary Mull

I coud go on but I'll stop there.

Then just for the hell of it lets ad those two young whippersnappers
Chuck Paine
Bob Perry

Walk down any dock in any marina in north America and mention those names to any sailor and they wil have heard those names and most probably have some knowledge of each designer's work.

All of those designers have one thing in common. They are learned their craft working in what you call an "urban office". They did it the old fashioned way, working for older men who were experts at the craft. I suppose any of them could have taken off and gone cruising but they didn't. They wanted to be yacht designers and they knew the path to get to a level where they could open their own offices and it wasn't out cruising. Some technical education in yacht design was and is required. Those guys on my list are pretty well known today. Some are quite famous.

Now walk down a dock and mention Brent Swain and I am pretty darn sure you will just get a blank stare back.
" Who?"
Sorry but this is the real world. You wanted "real"

Maybe you should have taken the time to get some professional training as a yacht designer. You might be comfortable with numbers now and not stumble over the technical side of yacht design saying stupid things. Numbers are our common vocabulary when discussing many of the design features of any boat A good designer has be happy and confident working with the numbers. If you are uicomfortable with numbers you are really going to struiggle with any analysis of stability. I did my first stability study by hand. Maybe Brent, you would have had some training in how to design a pleasant looking deck house.

But you did it your way and it shows in your handful of boats. I did it my way and I think it shows in my body of work and numerous very succesful designs. I followed the path set down by a lot of the men I looked up to in this field from the time I was a boy. Really, I did it "their way" and I am grateful to the men who hired me and mentored me as I worked to learn the craft. If I had to do it over again I would do it exactly the same way. It has worked quite well for me.
 
#899 ·
Brent:
Check out this list:
OIlin Stephens
Phil Rhodes
John Alden
German Frers
Bruce Farr
Bill Lapworth
Gary Mull

I coud go on but I'll stop there.

Then just for the hell of it lets ad those two young whippersnappers
Chuck Paine
Bob Perry

Walk down any dock in any marina in north America and mention those names to any sailor and they wil have heard those names and most probably have some knowledge of each designer's work.

All of those designers have one thing in common. They are learned their craft working in what you call an "urban office". They did it the old fashioned way, working for older men who were experts at the craft. I suppose any of them could have taken off and gone cruising but they didn't. They wanted to be yacht designers and they knew the path to get to a level where they could open their own offices and it wasn't out cruising. Some technical education in yacht design was and is required. Those guys on my list are pretty well known today. Some are quite famous.

Now walk down a dock and mention Brent Swain and I am pretty darn sure you will just get a blank stare back.
" Who?"
Sorry but this is the real world. You wanted "real"

Maybe you should have taken the time to get some professional training as a yacht designer. You might be comfortable with numbers now and not stumble over the technical side of yacht design saying stupid things. Numbers are our common vocabulary when discussing many of the design features of any boat A good designer has be happy and confident working with the numbers. If you are uicomfortable with numbers you are really going to struiggle with any analysis of stability. I did my first stability study by hand. Maybe Brent, you would have had some training in how to design a pleasant looking deck house.

But you did it your way and it shows in your handful of boats. I did it my way and I think it shows in my body of work and numerous very succesful designs. I followed the path set down by a lot of the men I looked up to in this field from the time I was a boy. Really, I did it "their way" and I am grateful to the men who hired me and mentored me as I worked to learn the craft. If I had to do it over again I would do it exactly the same way. It has worked quite well for me.
They all have one thing in common. They alll leave the helmsman in an open cockpit as the only steeriing option; bad seamanship, of the most naive and pretentious kind . Another thing they have in common.Benteau would be extremy wise to hire them for their aesthetic genius, to eliminate the extreme uglines of Beneteaus ( and other similar boats, like Hunters, Jeneaus, etc
 
#865 · (Edited)
Wood boat construction?
It's a fad.
It will never stand the test of time.
But just in case it proves OK in a few years, here are three woodies of mine. A handsome trio of fine timber yachts.

Oh yeah, on The schooner, we didn't want to risk the rig on something as exerimental as Spruce so the spars you see in that photo, masts, gaffs and booms are all carbon fiber.
 

Attachments

#876 ·
Bob - do you know what the specific paint was that was used on those carbon spars on the schooner? I want to paint (repaint) the spars on my Fortune that colour but haven't been able to find the right shade in the colour charts.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top