Tally Ho

[john_morris_uk]

I’d be very surprised if the keel wasn’t entirely recast. Makes a lot of sense in the circumstances.

As it stands he’ll have some transom and some hatch coamings from the original “Tally Ho” plus perhaps the windlass? However I can’t help feeling it’ll be an even better built and stronger version of “Tally Ho Mk. 1.”

 

[Kukri]

I agree, John and Doug. He’s rebuilt everything to a better than original standard. She had, I think, three tons (maybe five) outside and eight inside and I think everyone will agree that as far as possible it ought all to be outside.

I would get rid of that geared capstan; they are awful things. He might find a contemporary Reid’s windlass, as recommended by Claud Worth in “Yacht Cruising” - published in 1911, the year the boat was launched - I had one in Mirelle and it was a delight. Or, of course, one of the new ones that that chap in Cornwall is making.

 

[prv]

I think that the keel should be recast.

I expect it will be.

Pete

 

[prv]

as far as possible it ought all to be outside.

Would you not leave a small amount inside to be shifted fore and aft as needed to adjust the trim after she’s launched?

Pete

 

[38mess]

You can count on Leo to do the right thing

 

[Rum_Pirate]

You can count on Leo to do the right thing

Which is?
What do you think that will be?

 

[Kukri]

Would you not leave a small amount inside to be shifted fore and aft as needed to adjust the trim after she’s launched?

Pete

A small amount, if needed, yes. But whereas in 1911 almost all yachtsmen were persuaded that inside ballast gave a more gentle motion to the boat and was therefore desirable, which no doubt was why Albert Strange, who did indeed know how to do the calculations for ballasting, put so much inside, we no longer think that way.

I’m sure Leo Goolden has been trying to find out how the inside ballast (doubtless long gone when he bought the boat) was arranged, and I’m sure that he and the NAs he is talking to will know what arrangements to make for changes in the hull structure weights.

 

[38mess]

Which is?
What do you think that will be?

Recast, he hasn't cut any corners until this. I wonder if he's not thinking straight with all the goings on

 

[halcyon]

Recast, he hasn't cut any corners until this. I wonder if he's not thinking straight with all the goings on

Inside ballast weight is listed in the Youtube video, around 4/5 ton ? should listen closer, plan was to move some below to keel.

In passing, like this rebuild project, other side of the coin to Tally Ho,

Brian

 

[Stemar]

An armchair expert writes...

I would guess that the fact that he's moved the boat means he's decided to recast the whole keel. If he were going to bodge it, it's much easier to do it with the boat in place so it can be fitted with a minimum of fuss, but if he's going to cut the whole thing up and start again, it's much easier to do it with the boat out of the way. The only question would be whether to do it at the old yard or at Port Townsend. It would be a lot easier to cart a load of lead in pieces than to have one big fragile lump to load onto a truck then off at the other end.

 

[Gary Fox]

A small amount, if needed, yes. But whereas in 1911 almost all yachtsmen were persuaded that inside ballast gave a more gentle motion to the boat and was therefore desirable, which no doubt was why Albert Strange, who did indeed know how to do the calculations for ballasting, put so much inside, we no longer think that way....

That's interesting, my (William Atkin designed) boat (50% ballast ratio) has 3 tons internal,and 3 tons external ballast. Does that no longer give a softer motion, were Atkin, Strange and the others wrong in that belief?
She has a very seakindly motion, but also stiffens up enormously when the rail gets near the water. Until I read your post, I thought her behaviour was perfect, and could not possibly be improved upon!
I understand the basic geometry involved. My humble gaffer carries the same weight of lead as a 60' Volvo ocean racer...except the latter carries it 4 metres below the waterline in a bulb!
Seaworthiness is greatly influenced by motion; if people need to hold on with white knuckles they tire quickly, get seasick, knock over the curry, the list goes on..it's not just about the maths, however many NA's pore over righting moments etc, and I think Leo is sticking his neck out and asking for trouble, if he makes drastic changes.

 

[Kukri]

That's interesting, my (William Atkin designed) boat (50% ballast ratio) has 3 tons internal,and 3 tons external ballast. Does that no longer give a softer motion, were Atkin, Strange and the others wrong in that belief?
She has a very seakindly motion, but also stiffens up enormously when the rail gets near the water. Until I read your post, I thought her behaviour was perfect, and could not possibly be improved upon!
I understand the basic geometry involved. My humble gaffer carries the same weight of lead as a 60' Volvo ocean racer...except the latter carries it 4 metres below the waterline in a bulb!
Seaworthiness is greatly influenced by motion; if people need to hold on with white knuckles they tire quickly, get seasick, knock over the curry, the list goes on..it's not just about the maths, however many NA's pore over righting moments etc, and I think Leo is sticking his neck out and asking for trouble, if he makes drastic changes.

I think Atkin and Strange and their contemporaries could only sell designs that their clientele would accept, and the yachtspeople of their day wanted “inside ballast to ease the motion”.

Uffa Fox crossed the Atlantic in the Atkin designed “Typhoon” in the 1920s and here are his conclusions in “Sailing Seamanship and Yacht Construction” in 1934.



For 29 years I owned a very orthodox 1930s built gaff cutter with three tons outside and one ton inside and I now own a superannuated 1970s offshore racer with seven tons in a fin. I have sailed on a pilot cutter with heaven knows how much inside and nothing outside.

To my very considerable surprise, the 1970s offshore racer is the most comfortable at sea, as long as you are not trying to travel at racing speed! Just dial down the horsepower that the hull and rig can generate to the sort of horsepower that the gaff rigs on the other two could generate and she turns into a pussy cat. She even heaves to nicely!

 

[38mess]

Inside ballast weight is listed in the Youtube video, around 4/5 ton ? should listen closer, plan was to move some below to keel.

In passing, like this rebuild project, other side of the coin to Tally Ho,

Brian

I thought I was listening...the plan was to get as much lead as possible below on the keel as he is lowering the floor to accommodate his 6 ft height. Even if only moving some lead to the keel surely it must be done properly? Recast is the only way to go.
I already watch and like yaba, very interesting project that most armchair experts wrote off at the start ? I also watch ship happens, those guys are having a laugh

 

[DownWest]

Might be something about changing the motion if the ballast is moved outside, as in stiffer with a sharper reaction. Remember Hammond Innes motoring hs new steel yacht over to Uk from Holland, but without rig. Extremely unpleasant sharp motion without the damping effect of the weight above.

 

[prv]

Might be something about changing the motion if the ballast is moved outside, as in stiffer with a sharper reaction.

Part of the reasoning is to counter a larger-than-designed rig.

Pete

 

[HissyFit]

Might be something about changing the motion if the ballast is moved outside, as in stiffer with a sharper reaction.

Part of the reasoning is to counter a larger-than-designed rig.

Indeed. Didn't Leo say he was returning the rig to the way it was for Tally Ho's Fastnet victories?

 

[burgundyben]

I particularly like 'it was all going so well right up to the point it wasnt going very well at all"

 

[Wansworth]

I would be apprehensive of putting much more than is already in the lead keel,lots of additional stresses,My first day at Hillyards was wheel borrowing the new black varnished pig iron out along the jetty to put aboard a new nine toner,I remarked that it seemed an awful lot and it transpired that the foreman thought the same but it had always been done that way so it all had to go in the bilges

 

[Kukri]

As she is now, that hull is heroically overbuilt. It isn’t just a question of doubling all the frames rather than just those in the Lloyd’s length; she has been rebuilt with much more care and precision than any commercial boatbuilder could use and hope to stay in business. There are no slack joints; the whole thing is “fag paper fit”. And Strange boats are never light on scantlings to start with.

The factor of safety in the keel bolts and floors of a conventionally built long keel carvel built boat is at least 10:1(*) - fin keels are an entirely different matter.

I don’t think Leo Goolden or those advising him will be concerned about moving two, three, four or five tons from inside to outside; she will be a better boat for it.

* I’m quoting someone, possibly Ian Nicholson, here.

 

[Stemar]

I particularly like 'it was all going so well right up to the point it wasnt going very well at all"

The very definition of sailing ...