Pan vs. stick buit boats

[sailingdog]

Don't forget to add stringers and floors to the hull... most "stick" built boats have both, most MacGregors don't.

Originally Posted by US27inKS

Not that I would ever try to confuse some of the fine pan built boats that I'm sure you've been looking at with a Mac, here's a good pic of the basic parts of a pan built boat. http://www.macgregor26.com/construct...arts_large.jpg

From left to right we have the hull, deck, headliner, and pan. On a boat without a pan, just delete the pan and possibly the headliner and replace with glassed in wood furniture.

[Jeff_H]

SailingDog's post seems to try to address one of the seeming misunderstandings in this thread. When you talk about glassed in, pan or force grid, these terms are referring to the method of constructing the internal structure of the boat. It has little or nothing to do with the way that the interior furnishings or finishes are constructed. My early posts probably should have clarified that a boat can have a full liner but that liner may have nothing to do with adding internal structure to the boat. It is only when the interior elements are designed and attached in a manner to stiffen the hull and deck that they become one of the three internal framing methods mentioned above.

Jeff

[sailingdog]

Correct, thanks for clarifying for me Jeff...

[Jeff_H]

In our discussion of how boats are framed, and the search for photos, there is a website http://divineenergies.org/morgan_30 that shows an early 1970's design Morgan 30 IOR race boat being rebuilt. In this case, there was minimal framing in this boat, but what there was was glassed into the hull. It is interesting to note that race boats of that era had far more comprehensive hull framing than similar sized cruising boats of that same era. By any modern standard, the Morgans of that era lack adequate framing.

That said rebuild photos clearly reflect some of the better thinking of the day. You can see how the face of the bunks and transverse bulkheads were glassed in to distribute loads both transversely and longitudinally. The bunk faces were used to transmit shroud loads to the hull over an enlarged area.

To compare this to a modern frame design, the transverse frames (floor timbers) would have been much deeper and carried much further up the hull. There would have been longinal framing closer to the centerline of the boat than would have been provided by the bulkhead with the shrouds and a second or third stringer placed somewhere between the rail and longitudinal that would exist near the keel. I would have expected to see extended length transverse frames in the area of the keel and some number of transverse frames or glassed in bulkheads to occur forward of the main bulkhead and aft through the run of the boat. These transverse framing elements would ideally have extended up onto the topside to the upper most longitudinal member.

Without that kind of framing, flexure and the resultant fatique can be a serious strength sapping problem over time.

In any event, back to the original discussion, that mix of longitudinal framing can be achieved with glassed in components, force grids, and pan systems. I still contend that using the term 'stick built' is a misnomer.

Jeff