gypsy moth, waste of money?

Re: A laudable waste but only a small one

It's laughable that you can relate the first aircraft to Gypsy Moth. People had been sailing for centuries before Chichester embarked on his adventure. In fact, the whole British Empire had come and gone!

Perhaps if you had actually visit the GM you'd understand what a piece of junk it is. And by the way, the original Wright Brother's aircraft of 1902 is toast.
 
Re: A laudable waste but only a small one

You could say the same about steam loco's. Inefficient, smelly, bad for the environment (see London Fogs). Yet I do not know many blokes, and blokets for that matter who do not go all gooey eyed when the occasional one goes thundering past. If we kept to your argument the chance to see such engineering feats of the past would be online as books seem to be out of fashion now.

I have no sentiments about GM, but I like the idea that she is available for my perusal should I ever gain more interest. I hope when she is finished and has completed her circ. that she will be kept somewhere I can see her and not in a private marina where I can only see her masts.
 
Re: A laudable waste but only a small one

Steam engines are lovely. But they are about great Victorian engineering.

GM is more like 1960s housing estates.
 
Re: A laudable waste but only a small one

Personally, as a boat builder of 35 years experience, I reckon someone is making an almighty profit out of this project. The estimated cost is certainly not "mates rates" or even the sort of price you would pay for a decent boatbuilder in the SW. Whether it is a worthy venture or not, it seems that the money donated is being spent rather freely. Are they planning to gold plate it?
 
Re: A laudable waste but only a small one

But the Wright Bros may well not be the first, so may not matter if it's toast, now talking of a chap in NZ, and a steam powered one has been test flown from the UK even earlier.
By preserving GM you prove how bad a yacht can be and still sail round the world single handed. Just think future generations may think they need a high tech tri-maran, and a mono hull was a myth only.

Brian
 
Re: A laudable waste but only a small one

Re G.M.My guess is that Sir Francis would rather it be burnt than restored. A gross waste of money
 
Re: Luckily

60 odd companies to date see a future for the project and a benefit for themselves. I don't think there's a lot of sentimentalty involved. It's just a do-able project, with a reasonable return and a bit of feel good.

Throughout the land, despite logic, without thought to how good a boat or car or train a thing is, individuals and small organizations are beavering away to restore little benchmarks from the past. Often they spend more than they can afford and have little clear idea of what they'll do if they get finished. The benefits are huge.

I don't know what Francis Chichester might have thought but I suspect he had a positive attitude and liked do'ers.
 
Re: Read Yachting Monthly

I think most posters in this thread should read the current issue of YM.

According to an article in this issue, one dilemma facing those in charge of the restoration is whether to correct the awful handling characteristics of GM. The designer of B&Q is quoted as saying the inherent design problems in GM were clearly understood even back in the 1960's.

Apparently a small amount of under water re-profiling will sort GM out.

I say go ahead, the reborn and redesigned 21st Century GM could be a testament to the crap state of British manufacturing in the 1960's.

B.T.W. Some independent financial governance is required to make sure C&N don't milk too much cash out of the project.
 
A (passionate) vote for

I personally support GM IV - not because of the company connection but because I think the whole initiative is worthy of support.

As a former editor of a consumer boating magazine I know just how much of a banana skin this whole project could have turned out to be for Paul Gelder, James Jermain and the Yachting Monthly team. The fact that they have not only been brave enough to stand as the catalyst for preventing GM IV becoming a pile of junk in Greenwich but also might now see her serve a useful purpose again is a welcome example in my book that some people in this country still have passion and a pulse.

As for GM IV's design, well it might be imperfect but it reminds me of the kind of classical yacht shapes that I grew up with thanks to the model hulls that my great grandfather carved out of solid lumps of wood and my grandfather took me on all too rare but precious occasions to sail on a boating pond in Eastbourne.

Sentimental clap-trap? Yes of course - but off the back of that (and my Dad's subsequent enthusiasm for dinghy sailing) I have found a life-long interest in boating.

No doubt the exploits of Sir Francis Chichester did the same for many. Sadly we no longer have the man but I for one am glad we still have his boat.

Finally, having read through the posts here (and previous ones made on the same subject) I do think any talk along the lines of we could spend a million doing better things is ignoring one fundamental truth. No GMIV campaign = no £1m. It's not a pot of gold waiting to be claimed, the majority of it still has to be raised.

If we think there is real merit in raising a million or more to get more kids off their arses and out to sea, as an entirely separate thing, count me in. I have long harboured a dream to see boating used as a vehicle for motivating more youngsters and have never been brave enough to do anything about it. So if you are serious about it, let's do it, define the project and see if it stands the test of people's enthusiasm to support it.
 
Having not looked at this project before with any real interest I thought I had better take a better look. What struck me is that £1 million squid is a lot of money to restore a 38 foot wooden boat. C&N might have been the original builders but I would have thought that if the project was to be done at a cheaper price, it might have been worth looking at one of the less high profile yards, or even a boat building college like at Lowestoft, I wonder whether these were given any thought? I think the project is worth doing but I dont like the figures.
 
Governance is in place

[ QUOTE ]
A restoration committee has been set up with YM, the UKSA and the Maritime Trust, reserving the right to either cancel the circumnavigation or substitute an alternative route if funds for the costs of the voyage are not forthcoming.

[/ QUOTE ]

Statement is on the GMIV microsite homepage. It is not in anyone's interests to see overspends occur.

C&N also on record as saying it will treat GMIV as a charitable project.
 
Re:My understanding is

that the projected costing includes getting the thing around the world again and leaves a bit in the pot for a refit and some running costs on it's return.

Much of the million pound target is not real money it's product. Crusader Sails for example have come up with about 20k's worth of sails and covers.

Talking to people on the project the C&N take could well come out at less than £300k. Still a lot of dosh but renovation is costly.

The Greenwich crowd tarted her up a little while ago for 30k. Now that was a waste of money.
 
Why restore a mediocre boat ?
Why restore a mediocre building ?
Why restore a mediocre car ?

As Woodentop says...it's what we do. The British have this bizarre habit of revering anything old, even when it has no intrinsic merit. A trust to introduce disadvantaged kids to sailing in a fleet of AWBs would be an excellent way of helping extend the sucess of our olympic sailing into other classes. After Day Mellon/Mike and the olympics we now need something on the Admirals Cup, AAC et el. To move the perception away from sailing being an elitist pastime. Then the politicos might give us a bit more credence.
Stick the old boat under a tent or something if we must but the restoration is money down the drain. IMHO of course!
 
Re:My understanding is

[ QUOTE ]
the projected costing includes getting the thing around the world again

[/ QUOTE ]
Hmm. I think the restoration is worthwhile but the RTW plan sounds like a free jolly for a clique Solent yachting notables. No doubt a handful underprivileged youngsters will be shoved to front for the photo opportunities.

Surely the charitable investment would be better rewarded by giving many more people the opportunity participate in middle distance events like cruises NW Spain, the Azores or the Fastnet?
 
Re: A laudable waste but only a small one

The nice people who are paying for, or profiting from the rebuilding of GM have not so far commented on the work I am doing on my own boat.
Therefore I see no need for me to interfere with their plans.
There are enough people already who enjoy telling other folk what to do, how to do it and how much to spend and many of them who seem to think that if they don't want to do something no one else should be permitted to.
Well, stuff 'em.

IanW /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif
 
Re:Ah!

[ QUOTE ]
But would it give global exposure to the brands that stumped up the dosh?

[/ QUOTE ]
The largest commercial contribution has been £20k of sails from Crusader. Would the absence of the round-the-world element of project have been a deal breaker?

I suspect that the greatest need is for cash to pay the CN labour invoice. As we have seen from this thread, many question the £1 million bill to restore a 58ft wood yacht.

Perhaps small value public donations would be more forthcoming if people believed they were paying for the essential renovation plus a typical low budget value for money sailing charity operating in home waters.

At the very least the founders of this project should make it clear that the basic renovation does not require all the £1 million budget.
 
Re:That was the case

It's not in general circulation yet because it's early days, but the IOW have come in with some heavy funding and talking to their guy it's the global exposure plus the ongoing IOW based elements thats attracted them in.

While Crusader is hardly a global brand who's to say what there aspirations are. International Paints, B&G, C&N, Mount Gay Rum & Plymouth Gin and a host of others can claim global reputations.

It's estimate that PR opportunities to date have created 90k of publicity that sponsors can point to. These are a bit smoke and mirrors but the project has generated a decent amount of interest in the media.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top