PeterGibbs
New member
I sense the constructional comparisons and subsequent fears for hull integrity have something in common with cars when they passed from chassi construction to monocoque - ie "those welds will never hold when the car corners etc! "
I see no reason why boats composed of bulkheads, stringers and "welded in" liners etc cannot be as stiff as something built out of "virgin Patagonian spruce with larch lappings" to coin a technique.
I guess the majority of us don't get to talk that often to the people who design and actually build these new technique boats, but everyone can visit a factory where they can be seen in the making. I have a Bavaria and went for a day to Giebelstadt
and watched the process very carefully. It is reassuring, it really is. I would not have progressed if it were not so.
Thes boats just do not vanish off the scope through structural failure, do they? They make the ARC with boring regularity. The books containing stories of total loss, conflict with cetaceans etc are so often about vessels of charm and some years, built of wood with long keels etc - is there some romance at work here?
Evans Starzinger wrote a most interesting piece in YW last month comparing performance of long and short keels in breaking seas. He finds there is little difference in performance. He dismisses lying a hull in such conditions, but there are any number of seasoned sailors who advocate this. His comments seem well founded. I still find the romantic interpretation of boat design is not for me.
So it comes down to a difference in riding comfort / interior layout etc between the main producers today, not one of safety. The lower prices charged vs good old Brit boats such as Westerly etc is not a token of inferior quality - boats are not generally purchased by the kilo.
So that's where I come out - I would be intereseted to hear reasoned comments that explore the subject further but romantic assertions are just that!
PWG
I see no reason why boats composed of bulkheads, stringers and "welded in" liners etc cannot be as stiff as something built out of "virgin Patagonian spruce with larch lappings" to coin a technique.
I guess the majority of us don't get to talk that often to the people who design and actually build these new technique boats, but everyone can visit a factory where they can be seen in the making. I have a Bavaria and went for a day to Giebelstadt
and watched the process very carefully. It is reassuring, it really is. I would not have progressed if it were not so.
Thes boats just do not vanish off the scope through structural failure, do they? They make the ARC with boring regularity. The books containing stories of total loss, conflict with cetaceans etc are so often about vessels of charm and some years, built of wood with long keels etc - is there some romance at work here?
Evans Starzinger wrote a most interesting piece in YW last month comparing performance of long and short keels in breaking seas. He finds there is little difference in performance. He dismisses lying a hull in such conditions, but there are any number of seasoned sailors who advocate this. His comments seem well founded. I still find the romantic interpretation of boat design is not for me.
So it comes down to a difference in riding comfort / interior layout etc between the main producers today, not one of safety. The lower prices charged vs good old Brit boats such as Westerly etc is not a token of inferior quality - boats are not generally purchased by the kilo.
So that's where I come out - I would be intereseted to hear reasoned comments that explore the subject further but romantic assertions are just that!
PWG
