Best Yacht Designer in the GRP Era

[Nicholas123]

See my response to rogerball above.

Also wish I had taken a photo of an Elizabethan 29 undergoing similar treatment when blasting the hull went straight through the bilge and the keel area exposing the ballast. Boat was written off as the hull moulding was so bad.

You might have seen the insurance thread of the Westerly Griffon that sank because one of the keels broke away.

None of this excuses the sort of thing in your clip, but just a reminder that c**p boats have been built in all ages of boat building.

I don't suppose you could provide a link to that could you Tranona? I ask because a Westerly Griffin sank very close to my mooring before Christmas & I was trying to determine the reason.I'm not sure I did'nt spot something wrong with one of the keels

 

[Resolution]

The possible negative consequences of grounding have always been there, although of course potentially more severe with high aspect ratio keels. However that is so accepted that people adjust what they try to do with their boats in recognition of the issue. If you sail in areas where grounding is common, such as Scandinavia where nudging up bows to on rocky foreshores is a recognised way of anchoring then it is not surprising that boats are designed with this in mind. Even there, though long keels and cutaway forefoots are falling out of fashion, perhaps reflecting the growth in marinas and quay anchorages.

The YW article quoted earlier summarised what reliable statistics that are available and it shows few failures (that lead to losses) are the direct result of design or construction but mostly due to grounding or poor repairs. I share your concern about modern construction methods, although now on my second boat built in this way. The first one did 7 years as a charter boat in Greece where as you know banging rocks is common, without any damage. However I think that it is rather like modern cars where the structure is designed to be deformable rather than resistant. Therefore on the rare occasion that grounding seriously damages the structure, repairs might involve more than just slapping on extra glass and resin. This came out strongly in Cheeky Rafiki enquiry where there was no clear consensus on how to deal with such repairs and a recommendation for further research into the subject.

Concur with much of the above. When I took my (deep fin lead keel) Sabre 42 up to Stockholm in 2013 we found that our draught was often too much to nuzzle into the shoreline, and had to anchor off. Then when we met the unexpected rock one day at about six knots, the lead down at the bottom did a fair job of absorbing the impact!

 

[bigwow]

Richard Woods,

 

[JumbleDuck]

I don't suppose you could provide a link to that could you Tranona? I ask because a Westerly Griffin sank very close to my mooring before Christmas & I was trying to determine the reason.I'm not sure I did'nt spot something wrong with one of the keels

This is the thread:

http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?446143-the-pain-of-boat-insurance

if you don't want to plough through the whole thing, the first post and number 62, which is at

http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?446143-the-pain-of-boat-insurance&p=5560927#post5560927

cover what you need to know. The boat sank in Fareham Creek, by the way.

 

[alant]

As to designers... I give you Gerrard Danson.

He managed to design a pretty looking cat.. then I am slightly biased.

What is it?

 

[JumbleDuck]

What is it?

A Wharram with the remain of a crashed 737 strapped on top, I think.

 

[Tranona]

Anyone mentioned C J Roy? Anyone that could design the Macwester 27 mark 2 had to be a genius :encouragement:

Yes - earlier on as one of those pioneers of the use of GRP rather than his ability to design good sailing boats!

 

[Tranona]

The most novel quote for me on this link:

http://www.yachtingworld.com/news/keel-failure-shocking-facts-60006/4

Is from Pantaenius man Jonathan Reynolds:

"Any unreasonable delay in undertaking an inspection after grounding may result in an insurer rejecting a claim and hence this could leave an owner liable for any repairs or consequential legal liability in the event of a loss of life."

The sort of thing that we often hear on these Forums and which always sounds a bit far fetched; maybe not so much now. Perhaps I should worry, I am insured with this lot.

The key word in that quote is "may". Insurers, like bankers always like to sow a seed of uncertainty when giving advice like that with no examples to illustrate the point. Just gives them a lead in the future if they wanted to try and use this as a reason for rejecting a claim - "we warned you...".

However policies usually have a catch all condition that the boat must be kept in good order so the possibility has always been there. Whether it is used will come down to the facts of the case. for example in the recent thread on a rejected claim it was easy to use this sort of reason because there was a specific condition that the damaged keel had to be repaired so it was easy to reject the claim as the earlier defect had not been repaired.

 

[bigwow]

What is it?

Outremer ?

 

[alant]

Outremer ?

Woops, not for sailing in isis country then, with a name like that.

 

[Concerto]

By your own description it was NOT the bank who broke the business. That is commercially naive.
Sounds like what broke the business was
- squandering the business working capital buying an extra factory that it didn't need - looks like a huge own goal
- lack of orders - no new orders at boat show and many existing dealer orders cancelled
- exchange rate movements making the boats unattractive to export markets (and perhaps not as efficient as other European builders anyway)

So sounds like the business broke itself, with a bit of help from sterling expanse rate. Shame as some quite nice boats, but perhaps had rested on laurels from previous success and not seen overseas competition coming.
If they had not squandered their capital there would have been no bank loan to be called in. And with poor income the bank was probably making a reasonable assessment of the commercial corner the directors had chosen to get into

Perhaps buying an extra factory to expand on increasing sales and good order book was the wrong thing for a business to do. The overdraft was quite affordable and expected to be cleared in a couple of years. The rapid change in exchange rates killed their forward orders and the bank thought Westerly were now a bad risk for the bank. The management had already taken steps to reduce their main cost of staff, but the bank did not think it was enough and wanted to cash in the assets of the business. The MD was still sore after all these years at the way the bank acted. He also commented that for a few months any ordered boats that were in production, then cancelled, were just left as is and they concentrated on finishing all the boats still with buyers. Cancelled boats were then completed as new customers agreed to purchase. Within 6 months the company was trading at a profit and sales started to increase again.

How I found this out is also interesting. My Fulmar has the sail number 38, yet the hull mould number is L7 - the 7th fin keeled yacht. No one in the Westerly Owners Association could answer why the numbers were so far apart. For the first 12 months since the Fulmar was first launched, it was only available in fin keel format. So I took the bull by the horns and phoned Ed Dubois, the Fulmar designer. A ¾ hour chat did not give me any answer, but he suggested phoning the old MD. All I had was a name and the town he lived in from the Association list of members. Directory Enquiries listed a number of people in the town and I started phoning and hoping to get lucky. Well eventually I spoke to the MD's wife as he was out and she promised he would call back. About ½ hour later he returned my call. This was a very interest phone call and answered many questions. My Fulmar was originally an export boat and was a cancelled ordered. The moulded hull was left outside without a deck as the the deck has a mould number of M2 - the deck allocated to the second twin keel Fulmar. All of the parts within the boat are labled L7, except the water tank which is marked L4 (probably had a leak sealed and then used). So my hull had a LLoyds Mould Certificate dated 2 April 1980 and Builders Certificate dated 29 September 1980. The Fulmar normally took about 6 weeks to complete, not the 6 months mine took. So my Fulmar was the 38th one completed.

 

[Resolution]

Perhaps buying an extra factory to expand on increasing sales and good order book was the wrong thing for a business to do. The overdraft was quite affordable and expected to be cleared in a couple of years. The rapid change in exchange rates killed their forward orders and the bank thought Westerly were now a bad risk for the bank. The management had already taken steps to reduce their main cost of staff, but the bank did not think it was enough and wanted to cash in the assets of the business. The MD was still sore after all these years at the way the bank acted.

.

It's quite understandable that the MD would be sore about the bank; it must have been a traumatic period for him and his board of directors. Nevertheless, if you put together your description of events together with that of Chris Robb (see his post somewhere above), an independent businessman could conclude:
1. At a time of increasing market volatility (exchange rates, interest rates) it was unwise to commit further capital to fixed assets which could not be realised at short notice;
2. It was downright foolhardy to fund this purchase from overdraft. The term of any bank funding should match the liquidity or ability to realise the assets being used as security, and any business borrower should be able to understand what "repayable on demand" means.
3. If the MD thought the overdraft was "quite affordable and expected to be cleared in a couple of years" then his judgement of what lay ahead was clearly faulty.

To blame the bank in this case is a bit tough on the bank.

Of course the bank that tried to foreclose on my own property at about this time, just because I was in arrears, was acting like a typical barsteward bank and I will hate them forever!

 

[Chris_Robb]

By your own description it was NOT the bank who broke the business. That is commercially naive.
Sounds like what broke the business was
- squandering the business working capital buying an extra factory that it didn't need - looks like a huge own goal
- lack of orders - no new orders at boat show and many existing dealer orders cancelled
- exchange rate movements making the boats unattractive to export markets (and perhaps not as efficient as other European builders anyway)

So sounds like the business broke itself, with a bit of help from sterling expanse rate. Shame as some quite nice boats, but perhaps had rested on laurels from previous success and not seen overseas competition coming.
If they had not squandered their capital there would have been no bank loan to be called in. And with poor income the bank was probably making a reasonable assessment of the commercial corner the directors had chosen to get into

I am afraid David Saunders recollection is somewhat distorted by what he wants to remember. If only it could have been put down to the recession - an early example of our disastrous involvement in the ERM experiment. I have to go up to London now. I am not sure that it would be correct of me to write the complete history - I was the Finance Controller, and I was very fond of David Saunders. But the debacle was a classic of every lesson I ever learned - and as with an AJP Tailor - Origins of War - Railway Timetables (1st world war) was the underlying cause. With Westerly it was a break down in management communications - ie Something called "Directors dining rooms." I think perhaps the Finance DIrector was the major fly in the ointment.

Incidentally - we bought the freehold of not 1 factory, but ALL the leased premises on the Waterloovile industrial estate. This was after sales had already fallen off badly and we had agreed a massive cut back in production...... (Hence the directors dining rooms issue) I knew nothing of the purchase until the Monday morning - when I found we had no cash and an unrealistic overdraft facility negotiated without ANY cash flow information.

 

[Nicholas123]

This is the thread:

http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?446143-the-pain-of-boat-insurance

if you don't want to plough through the whole thing, the first post and number 62, which is at

http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?446143-the-pain-of-boat-insurance&p=5560927#post5560927

cover what you need to know. The boat sank in Fareham Creek, by the way.

Thanks for that.Very interesting.

 

[Nicholas123]

Yes - earlier on as one of those pioneers of the use of GRP rather than his ability to design good sailing boats!

Ah well there you are.Now I have put him on the map for designing good sailing boats.

Of course the criteria stipulated in the op's post is rather broad so maybe first of all what constitutes a good sailing boat should be identified?

 

[Tranona]

Ah well there you are.Now I have put him on the map for designing good sailing boats.

Of course the criteria stipulated in the op's post is rather broad so maybe first of all what constitutes a good sailing boat should be identified?

Always a problem with "best". As I pointed out earlier by initially limiting it to "GRP era" implies that it was related to using the material whereas I think he meant in the time period when GRP became the norm. Anyway it did not work as many of the designers lauded here were active (and probably at their best) long before GRP became the norm.

Anyway if you stick to the narrow definition Roy would certainly be there as somebody who pioneered the use of GRP and produced boats that fulfilled a need and were successful at the time. However, he quickly fell behind when others made better use of the material to produce boats that were better at meeting customers' needs. As you know his designs still have a following and are appreciated by some.

 

[Nicholas123]

Always a problem with "best". As I pointed out earlier by initially limiting it to "GRP era" implies that it was related to using the material whereas I think he meant in the time period when GRP became the norm. Anyway it did not work as many of the designers lauded here were active (and probably at their best) long before GRP became the norm.

Anyway if you stick to the narrow definition Roy would certainly be there as somebody who pioneered the use of GRP and produced boats that fulfilled a need and were successful at the time. However, he quickly fell behind when others made better use of the material to produce boats that were better at meeting customers' needs. As you know his designs still have a following and are appreciated by some.

I think what you really mean here is were influenced by fashion? Whether many of them could be considered good sailing boats is debatable when you consider their application.

 

[Tranona]

I think what you really mean here is were influenced by fashion? Whether many of them could be considered good sailing boats is debatable when you consider their application.

No. Nothing to do with "fashion" in the sense I think you are using it. Just better boats as his designs were not very good particularly as sailing boats, although they were good on use of space. The short period of time they were in production is perhaps illustrative of how quickly other designers and builders produced more successful products.

 

[Nicholas123]

No. Nothing to do with "fashion" in the sense I think you are using it. Just better boats as his designs were not very good particularly as sailing boats, although they were good on use of space. The short period of time they were in production is perhaps illustrative of how quickly other designers and builders produced more successful products.

Are 'better boats' ones that you would'nt want to risk in shallow waters & that are impractical in many other ways? It clearly depends on what you want to use your boat for.

I'll have to check up on the history but the Macwester Boat Company seemed like a very impressive Company to me with a very broad range of designs selling thousands of boats over ten or twenty years.Many of which are still going strong at least 30 or 40 years later.
I wonder how many of the modern boats we see being built will be able to boast anything like that!Very very few I suspect.

 

[Wansworth]

C s ROY started working with Westerly I think.From my point of view he was not making any ground breaking designs but producing a glass fibre Hilliard type, the family boat.Having sailed a 26 I was not bold over but apparently the 27 is a good sailer.Having looked at various Macs to buy I bought a Vega but if I had found a 27 with a good sensible interior I would have bought it.The little 22 footer I found to be a great sailer.