Forum Rules - Definition of a MAB & AWB

When you stop worrying about adding another scrape? :cool:

you see - even you can do it - you have just made a sensible contribution to what defines a MAB!

I think its a good point and probably the best one that defines the stage when an AWB should be reclassified as a MAB.

I will repeat something I have written before - What I love about sailing is when i see a 24' 35yr old boat go past on a sunny day and in a nice breeze, dog sat on foredeck and wife and hubby in cockpit and you cannot wipe the grins off their faces. They are getting as much if not possibly more pleasure out of their sailing as the guy in his mega buck sailing super yacht. Sailing IMHO is a great leveler
 
you see - even you can do it - you have just made a sensible contribution to what defines a MAB!

I think its a good point and probably the best one that defines the stage when an AWB should be reclassified as a MAB.

I will repeat something I have written before - What I love about sailing is when i see a 24' 35yr old boat go past on a sunny day and in a nice breeze, dog sat on foredeck and wife and hubby in cockpit and you cannot wipe the grins off their faces. They are getting as much if not possibly more pleasure out of their sailing as the guy in his mega buck sailing super yacht. Sailing IMHO is a great leveler

I find quite the opposite when I put the sails up ...
 
Sailfree; You ought to know by now that I am always happy to state the bleedin' obvious. :rolleyes:

I might add a paraphrase of the Great Dylan Winter;

"The view is always better from the cockpit of the slug looking at these delightful boats that it is for them having to look at the slug."
 
Last edited:
There is a brilliant phrase that cropped up on another thread.

http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=334003

Wooden Ships of Primitive Build (WSoPB). I think the forum should adopt it. It seems it's an official term used by the MCA, unlike MAB & AWB.

So must they be dugouts only or lashed with split Yew withies? Or can they use trenails? Do later techniques like copper rivets & moss stuffing still count?
 
There is a brilliant phrase that cropped up on another thread.

http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=334003

Wooden Ships of Primitive Build (WSoPB). I think the forum should adopt it. It seems it's an official term used by the MCA, unlike MAB & AWB.

Hold the front page!! Wooden boats are primitive - official, say MCA!! That should, quite rightly, add fuel to the embers of this debate.
 
So must they be dugouts only or lashed with split Yew withies? Or can they use trenails? Do later techniques like copper rivets & moss stuffing still count?

I guess anything wooden. No reason why there should be any truth, logic or consistency involved.
 
So a brand new, state of the art, bespoke racing prototype in cold moulded ply is a primitive boat? :confused:

Curioser & curioser, as Alice said. :D

OK, as I guess that involves epoxy it wouldn't be called primitive. Anything 'traditional' then.

Of course you could ask the MCA, but that would put an end to the speculation.
 
OK, as I guess that involves epoxy it wouldn't be called primitive. Anything 'traditional' then.

Of course you could ask the MCA, but that would put an end to the speculation.

There aren't many wooden boat building/repair techniques that don't involve epoxy resins & wood glues these days. Even back in the 50's & 60's plywood designs by the likes of Maurice Griffiths used resourcinel glues.

I mean a shoal draft MG Eventide, is not traditional by any stretch, but it is definitely going to be an MAB

Glib definitions are not easy are they? :D
 
Wooden Ships of Primitive Build (WSoPB). I think the forum should adopt it. It seems it's an official term used by the MCA

The regulations in question implement an EU Directive. I don't know, but I suspect that phrase probably originated in the Directive and was carried across unchanged. It feels to me like somewhat poorly translated French - technically correct, but not having the right connotations to be clear to a native English speaker.

Pete
 
Perhaps the difference lies in the thinkingnbehind the design..

If you look at a 70's boat they are generally designed as a boat that sails.. Then some time in the eighties boat designs seemed to change towards emphasis on selling not sailing... these are typacilly the AWB shapes so loved and hated..

However it must be recognised that much of the AWB design has been lead by the racing nutters... Indeed this afternoon I was looking at some pretty hot racing boats in Cowes. By many reconings they count as AWB's being flat bottomed, fin keels, spade rudder, big wide back end with sleeping Etc.. yet these are state of the art go fast jobs..

So with a lot of racing development in the design a modern AWB will out perform a MAB ...!!

Time to wash my mouth with more whiskey
 
Perhaps the difference lies in the thinkingnbehind the design..

If you look at a 70's boat they are generally designed as a boat that sails.. Then some time in the eighties boat designs seemed to change towards emphasis on selling not sailing... these are typacilly the AWB shapes so loved and hated..

However it must be recognised that much of the AWB design has been lead by the racing nutters... Indeed this afternoon I was looking at some pretty hot racing boats in Cowes. By many reconings they count as AWB's being flat bottomed, fin keels, spade rudder, big wide back end with sleeping Etc.. yet these are state of the art go fast jobs..

So with a lot of racing development in the design a modern AWB will out perform a MAB ...!!

Time to wash my mouth with more whiskey

Getting back into serious mode, you raise interesting points. Are modern boats that will easily outsail MABs still AWBs? I think of AWBs as being beamy, having lots of accommodation in the quarter cabin(s), having a mainsheet on the coachroof, skimping a bit on the ballast and being built & sold in large numbers. I wouldn't consider the like of Arconas, X-Yachts or Grand Soleils as AWBs. For a start they are not average, just modern and many of them have better stability than many MABs.
 
I guess anything wooden. No reason why there should be any truth, logic or consistency involved.

Perhaps the difference lies in the thinkingnbehind the design..

If you look at a 70's boat they are generally designed as a boat that sails.. Then some time in the eighties boat designs seemed to change towards emphasis on selling not sailing...

No so. A couple of weeks ago we had the pleasure of meeting the designer and building of our 1961 old wooden.

She was built "for the people" to a sales price of £875, using very latest technology and to give the very best level of sail ability and comfort.

They stopped making leisure boats when a new vat rate crippled the uk market.

Every boat was designed to sell to a well defined market.
 
just modern and many of them have better stability than many MABs.

Something that is often forgotten is that many state of the art cruiser racers of their time that are now MABs actually had lousy stability as the IOR penalised stability. Just remember all those boats with keels where the ballast was at the hull end of the keel rather than the bottom and required an army of folks sitting on the windward rail to try and keep them upright when going to wind with their distorted sailplans. Huge genoas and tiny mains, again prompted by rating rules plus the skinny back ends that made downwind work rather exciting.
 
Top