Bob Perry

Something different for CA

Recommended Posts

If the designer owns the design, you pay the designer. If a yard wants to build to the design again for another customer, they owe a royalty to the designer. How much you pay is up to the designer.
Long time ago, a famous builder north of the Merrimack would get S&S to design a boat for them, and a year or so later after building to this plan, they'd come out with a new yard-"designed" model that was almost identical. This way they wouldn't pay the royalty. Needless to say, S&S stopped designing for them because of it. (It am pretty sure it was S&S but this story is from the 50s and I was told it in the early 80s....but you get the idea).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It can be a sticky issue. Before your time here in Honolulu, there was a brilliant 45 race boat owned by local attorney Darrell Johnson - M1, it was designed by Murray Ross and really looked like a big 505, or maybe even a giant I-14 (pre assyms).

 

It was a real speedster and a local racer tried to order up another edition of it - even spent quite a bit of money in the process, I was told - but in the end, the guy that commissioned the design, the guys that owned the tooling, and the New Guy couldn't/didn't reach any manner of agreement - and thus, WARSPITE (the Wylie 40-something) was selected and built.

 

It really WAS a shame, because that Ross 45 was so far ahead of its time - it could have easily been the One Design that ruled the world - imagine a 45-foot OD boat not unlike a TP52 long before the Mumm36 and Corel 45.

 

It coulda been a contenda. But in the end, it seemed the guy that paid the first set of bills wasn't interested in seeing copies, and had a reputation as a bit of a pitbull. It would seem that like so many things: it depends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm wondering what the skipper does with his pipe. Do the new Perry motorboats come with on deck ashtrays ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The guy who bought the prototype to the Kiwi 35 also bought the design rights, thus the Kiwi 35 was a different design. But usually the designer retains the rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm wondering what the skipper does with his pipe. Do the new Perry motorboats come with on deck ashtrays ?

 

No worries, I have never smoked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You had better watch out for that guy steering the prototype. Maybe he empties his pipe in the cup holders or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congrats on the new project, Kim. It looks grand.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While thinking of winches and masts, a provision to have a (removable) boom would allow for occasional hoisting, and fitting a riding sail, should you ever want both tenders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My dock is about 20" High out of the water. I pull my 21' St. Lawrence River Skiff out of the water onto it all the time by hand.

She weighs a bit over 100 pounds. I am not worried about the issue of loading the PT-11/Skiff.

 

I am much more interested right now in the HP/speed/economy study that is before us. I am meeting Bob this week, I am sure we will have lots of fun discussing the various issues.

 

Despite what some may think, engaging Bob on yacht design problems and issues is a hell of a lot of fun.

If your dock is 20" high, outward swing doors need some thought. Door interference with the home dock is just not stylish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While thinking of winches and masts, a provision to have a (removable) boom would allow for occasional hoisting, and fitting a riding sail, should you ever want both tenders.

I have been considering a riding/steadying sail. Too early to finalize anything like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

My dock is about 20" High out of the water. I pull my 21' St. Lawrence River Skiff out of the water onto it all the time by hand.

She weighs a bit over 100 pounds. I am not worried about the issue of loading the PT-11/Skiff.

I am much more interested right now in the HP/speed/economy study that is before us. I am meeting Bob this week, I am sure we will have lots of fun discussing the various issues.

Despite what some may think, engaging Bob on yacht design problems and issues is a hell of a lot of fun.

If your dock is 20" high, outward swing doors need some thought. Door interference with the home dock is just not stylish.
Depends on how high the doors are positioned......

post-8115-0-55857400-1489551033_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In my experience, it is uncommon for a designer to hand over the design to the owner. You'd have to charge a lot more for that. A *lot*.

 

Gotcha. So if I want a carbon cutter exactly like the four- or say the last one, as it probably has some evolutionary improvements, do I pay for the design work or just the production. Does the designer get a royalty from the builder? Just asking- I have no use for a carbon cutter...

 

 

In the case you are referring to with existing tooling and multiple boats already pulled off that tooling, most designers would accept a royalty for the next boat. Of course if you ask for any help or mods you should expect a bill.

 

Intellectual Property is a very important concept in the design business. Unless the Designer agrees to sell a design outright to a customer (almost unheard of) the Designer retains all IP Rights to that design.

An individual customer may contract for a one-off build of a design, and pays the fee for that service. This allows them to have one boat produced to the plans. But the Designer still owns the design and may sell it to other clients, in full or modified, unless contracted otherwise.

A yard may contract for a design and might pay an upfront fee, plus royalties for every boat produced. Some Designers, usually ones who are hungry, will take the royalties without the fee. The Designer retains the rights to the design. Contracts sometimes stipulate that the Designer will not produce a similar design for some period of time. This ensures the yard will have a chance to recoup their investment before they have to sell against a sistership offered by a competitor.

Of course there is a long, sleazy history of builders who don’t pay the royalty fees, including those who acquire the tooling after the initial builder goes out of business or decides they no longer wish to produce that model. There are other instances of builders doing multiple builds from one-off tooling, without the owner or the builder paying the Designer. This is all Theft of the Intellectual Property of the Designer.

There are many other questionable practices regarding Intellectual Property in the boating industry.

In an earlier thread Bob Perry mentions he did modifications to an Andrews linesplan. In order to do this, he would have needed the original lines plan, provided to him by the builder. Remember the builder did not own that Intellectual Property and had no business giving it to anyone without express written consent of the Designer. When the builder tried to hand that information to Perry he should have said wait, let’s call the Designer and get his OK.

On yet another thread Perry talks about doing a weight study and keel design for a Peterson boat under construction. He mentions the builder provided him Peterson’s drawings, including a lines drawing for another “more IOR” hull. Perry kept this Intellectual Property of Peterson’s instead of returning it to the builder! The builder had no right to provide Perry with ANY of the Peterson drawings without express written consent, and certainly not a lines plan that had nothing to do with the work requested. Remember, this project was for a replacement boat for the customer who chose Peterson over Perry for the contract. No Designer would want his current work handed to his direct competitor.

It is difficult to understand someone in the Design Business being that cavalier with Intellectual Property Rights of Designers. Is it any wonder others have no respect for the IP of Designers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone here pay any attention to anything AIR posts?

 

I think he just a Proa sock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ranti:

Yes, that's what I had in mind. Kind of like a mini van door but I don;t want any tracks or hardware to show outboard. I like the Ferrari door just because it's so unusual. But at the dock, open, it would hurt the look of the boat. I guess. Not sure.

Rather than minivan, what about something more like a heavy duty drawer slide? Cantilevered out from inside the topsides, and with structural latching hardware to secure it underway when closed. You should be able to have a completely clear walkway then

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

In my experience, it is uncommon for a designer to hand over the design to the owner. You'd have to charge a lot more for that. A *lot*.

 

Gotcha. So if I want a carbon cutter exactly like the four- or say the last one, as it probably has some evolutionary improvements, do I pay for the design work or just the production. Does the designer get a royalty from the builder? Just asking- I have no use for a carbon cutter...

 

 

In the case you are referring to with existing tooling and multiple boats already pulled off that tooling, most designers would accept a royalty for the next boat. Of course if you ask for any help or mods you should expect a bill.

 

Intellectual Property is a very important concept in the design business. Unless the Designer agrees to sell a design outright to a customer (almost unheard of) the Designer retains all IP Rights to that design.

An individual customer may contract for a one-off build of a design, and pays the fee for that service. This allows them to have one boat produced to the plans. But the Designer still owns the design and may sell it to other clients, in full or modified, unless contracted otherwise.

A yard may contract for a design and might pay an upfront fee, plus royalties for every boat produced. Some Designers, usually ones who are hungry, will take the royalties without the fee. The Designer retains the rights to the design. Contracts sometimes stipulate that the Designer will not produce a similar design for some period of time. This ensures the yard will have a chance to recoup their investment before they have to sell against a sistership offered by a competitor.

Of course there is a long, sleazy history of builders who don’t pay the royalty fees, including those who acquire the tooling after the initial builder goes out of business or decides they no longer wish to produce that model. There are other instances of builders doing multiple builds from one-off tooling, without the owner or the builder paying the Designer. This is all Theft of the Intellectual Property of the Designer.

There are many other questionable practices regarding Intellectual Property in the boating industry.

In an earlier thread Bob Perry mentions he did modifications to an Andrews linesplan. In order to do this, he would have needed the original lines plan, provided to him by the builder. Remember the builder did not own that Intellectual Property and had no business giving it to anyone without express written consent of the Designer. When the builder tried to hand that information to Perry he should have said wait, let’s call the Designer and get his OK.

On yet another thread Perry talks about doing a weight study and keel design for a Peterson boat under construction. He mentions the builder provided him Peterson’s drawings, including a lines drawing for another “more IOR” hull. Perry kept this Intellectual Property of Peterson’s instead of returning it to the builder! The builder had no right to provide Perry with ANY of the Peterson drawings without express written consent, and certainly not a lines plan that had nothing to do with the work requested. Remember, this project was for a replacement boat for the customer who chose Peterson over Perry for the contract. No Designer would want his current work handed to his direct competitor.

It is difficult to understand someone in the Design Business being that cavalier with Intellectual Property Rights of Designers. Is it any wonder others have no respect for the IP of Designers?

 

AIR I'm in the Engineering industry and I disagree with you. If I have a contract with you to design a custom vessel in the process environment and you complete the design as contracted and you get paid in full, then don't I own the IP. The same goes with a custom yacht. Did Bob Perry not ask Kim Bottles' for permission to publish drawings of FL? On SA or any other form of media. We utilize Engineers to check and verify the work of other Engineers when the risk is high and when you require fresh and unbiased professional opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who owns the IP is entirely down to the contract. Unless AIR knows something more about the nature of those original contracts than he is saying, he is just pissing in the wind as usual

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Happy feat

 

I think that it also depends of the juridiction. In the UK when you refurbish an old building you can go to "building control" where there will often have microfiched structural drawings that you can consult. Nevertheless you aren't allowed to make a copy of the drawings without authorisation from the original designer. And if the original designer went bust, that's no excuse for not obtaining permission. On one hand it can be a PITA to have to spend several hours writing down what you see on the drawings but it is also nice to know that your hard work is protected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's funny when someone calls Bob, "Perry."

 

Bob did some design work for me. It was a blast, I hope for both of us. We never discussed "intellectual property." That would have made it less fun for both of us.

 

Life is too short to work on a boat design other than based on a (virtual) handshake. I trust Bob. He probably trusts me.

 

Here's some "intellectual property:"

 

O112_zpsc8edb073.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Happy feat

 

I think that it also depends of the juridiction. In the UK when you refurbish an old building you can go to "building control" where there will often have microfiched structural drawings that you can consult. Nevertheless you aren't allowed to make a copy of the drawings without authorisation from the original designer. And if the original designer went bust, that's no excuse for not obtaining permission. On one hand it can be a PITA to have to spend several hours writing down what you see on the drawings but it is also nice to know that your hard work is protected.

 

Given I work as a civil and structural engineer in teh UK, I can confidently state that nothin in teh above response is correct. There is no UK 'building control' which holds structural drawings for all buildings. If you're lucky the owner of the building may have some drawings, but probably not. Some councils have a central depository of drawings of buildings they own, but again its hit and miss what they have and whats been lost.

 

If someone does have drawings, they are invariably the property of the owner of that building, to do with as they please. As standard in UK (and every other part of the world I've worked in) for building and structural design contracts the finished design becomes wholly the property of the client.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have little interest in anything Air has to say. I have him on "ignore" But since he was quoted and I read it, in this case Kim told me to post the drawings of the boat. I did not ask Kim. Kim told me.

 

I post my drawings all the time. I am not concerned about anyone copying them. Why would they? Most are of historical interest only. I don't think I publish enough for anyone to reproduce one of my boats. I have been publishing drawings, including lines plans since I started in this business. I have never had a problem. I really don't think there is enough money involved in the yacht design business for anyone to be tempted to steal designs. By the time they would get around to "stealing" the design it would be an old design and worth little.

 

Here are some facts for you:

I always retain ownership of my designs unless I sell the rights to the builder. Not at all uncommon in my case.

I have agreed a few times never to sell the design to another client. People seldom want someone else's custom design. Doesn't happen. "Mind if I use your toothbrush?"

I used to do some expert witness work. Never saw a case involving a stolen design

I have never felt inclined to legally go after the builders and dealers who used my name on boats I did not design. Not enough money involved. I simply ask that they stop doing it.

I have had builders of boats similar to my designs ask if they could pay me a royalty to use my name as the designer. I have turned those offers down.

Several of my designs were sold "outright" to the builder. If receiving royalties was a concern, getting a big bag full of money at the start of the project was comforting.This is not at all unusual in my office .After Valiant moved to Texas they bought the design rights outright to all the Valiant models. That worked out well for me.

I think over the years I have working with just about every type of design contract possible and many times without any contract at all. I think I could write a book on it.

I have never had a contractual dispute with a client. I do know one well known designer who had a bitter fight with a client. He retired shortly after that project. I'll never retire.

 

Like I said, there may be some theoretical issues to this but in the real world I have not seen any problems. Not at all sure what the fuss is about. I'm pretty darn happy about the way mu business has worked out.

Kim and I are driving up to the Bettts yard this morning. We can chat about this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob and I have been friends for years, we don't need a contract. If you need a contract with your yacht designer, you have the wrong designer.

 

I am about to go get on the ferry in a few minutes to visit Bob, I don't think we will discuss contracts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An English businessman was quoted recently as saying that if he shook hands on a deal, that was it, he'd stick to it completely, but make him sign a contract and he'd do everything he could to twist it and maximise his position.

 

My idea of an intellectual property is something like the Fermi Institute

 

us_chicago.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Question: someone such as Kim decides he wants a certain type of custom boat. He pays someone such as Bob to design it. Someone else comes along and wants the same boat. Does Bob own the design or Kim? Assuming it's Bob, but Kim paid for it, is the other guy getting a free design? Or does Bob charge the new guy something for the right to build the design, but not as much as Kim, who hired him in the first place and for whom Bob drew the design. "



Dart:


I think Kim answered this question already but here's my take on it:


It doesn't happen. Custom designs are so personal that the chances of some one else wanting exactly what Kim wants are slim.


But for fun, let's say someone does want Kim's design.


I don't want to sell it to him. I would tell that client. "I can do you a better boat than Kim's."


There is a remote chance that someone would want Kim's hull but an entirely different deck and interior plan, a "semi-custom" design. In that case I'd approach it like a custom design and the new client would have to pay for the use of the hull design.



But in my office it has never happened.


Sometimes a client will say to me, "My boat is so perfect in every way, when the rest of the yachting world see it, they are all going to want one exactly like it."


It never happens.



I have not signed a design contract in years. I send a "letter of intent" explaining what I am going to do and how I am to be paid.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

@Happy feat

 

I think that it also depends of the juridiction. In the UK when you refurbish an old building you can go to "building control" where there will often have microfiched structural drawings that you can consult. Nevertheless you aren't allowed to make a copy of the drawings without authorisation from the original designer. And if the original designer went bust, that's no excuse for not obtaining permission. On one hand it can be a PITA to have to spend several hours writing down what you see on the drawings but it is also nice to know that your hard work is protected.

 

Given I work as a civil and structural engineer in teh UK, I can confidently state that nothin in teh above response is correct. There is no UK 'building control' which holds structural drawings for all buildings. If you're lucky the owner of the building may have some drawings, but probably not. Some councils have a central depository of drawings of buildings they own, but again its hit and miss what they have and whats been lost.

 

If someone does have drawings, they are invariably the property of the owner of that building, to do with as they please. As standard in UK (and every other part of the world I've worked in) for building and structural design contracts the finished design becomes wholly the property of the client.

 

 

They archive old submissions of structural calculations for building controls (https://www.istructe.org/getattachment/cfd44f46-987b-4013-9f30-750e4a19fd47/Building-Control.pdf - guidance from Istructr-E on this). Some of these include detailed drawings, especially older ones, I once found some gems really neatly drawn by hand. If you ask nicely, they will let you access the drawings, I've never managed to make a copy though. In most places where I have worked, there was a disclaimer at the bottom of the drawings saying no copying without permission otherwise copyright infringement.

 

At least this is how it was working in the late noughties when I was there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the ferry line to visit Bob now, Bob and I go so far back together I don't even get the letter of intent. We don't need one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry about that Kim. I don't want you to feel left out. How about this:

I'll design you a boat. Now may I please have some money?

 

That sounds better.

 

I was wracking my brain for a contractual dispute with a client. Could not come up with one. I'm more the "WTF let's get on with the boat" type.

 

But here was an interesting situation which ended up with me in the middle and not being comfortable. I'll tell you the story as faithfully as I can remember it. It's been about 38 years.

 

I designed a 70' boat to be built at a Tacoma yard. Client signed a contract with the yard with a percentage for profit up to the point where they produced the "base boat". Above that the profit percentage dropped in half.

At the end of the project the builder's bill was in excess of what the client wanted to pay. The sticking point was, exactly at what figure did we go over the line, i.e. the base boat. to get to the lower profit percentage. Lawyers got involved. The yard's book keeping was haphazard. Not unusual.

 

One day one of the yard managers and two lawyers came into my Ballard office and wanted to go over the plans. I said fine and walked them through the extensive set of drawings.

 

Around a week later, talking to my client's lawyer I mentioned the visit by the yard and their lawyers. My client's lawyer said, "We can't let that happen again. We must insulate you from them or they will want you as their expert witness. We want you as out expert witness." The plan was that I would submit a bill to my client for my time on the project after the launch. Apparently this would show that I was still being paid by the client and prevent the other side from having access to me. I sent the bill as instructed by the lawyer, $3,000.

 

Then I got a phone call from the client, He was mad as hell that I had the nerve to send him a bill. He was really mad. Really. The design fee had been considerable. I explained to the client that I had only sent them bill because his lawyer insisted that I do it. I had no intention of billing him for more money. "But your lawyer said to do it!" Didn't matter. It caused a rift that took over a year to heal. Really not sure it ever healed.

 

Southampton should pay me to teach a course on this. I bet Will would show up for class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry about that Kim. I don't want you to feel left out. How about this:

 

I'll design you a boat. Now may I please have some money?

 

That sounds better.

Sure Bob. See you soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

kdh and I had a great time designing his boat. I pretty much always have a good time with a new design. Hell, that's why do it. It's fun. And it keeps me in exotic hi-fi gear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Contracts don't mean much when dealing with snakes, only the lawyer wins in those situations. Better not to deal with snakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's funny when someone calls Bob, "Perry."

 

Bob did some design work for me. It was a blast, I hope for both of us. We never discussed "intellectual property." That would have made it less fun for both of us.

 

Life is too short to work on a boat design other than based on a (virtual) handshake. I trust Bob. He probably trusts me.

 

Here's some "intellectual property:"

 

O112_zpsc8edb073.png

 

 

Oooch !

 

I would say "artistic property" !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FYI - thanks to the miracle of fiberglass, you don't need anything but the actual boat to make another one. This is called "splashing" IIRC. Rybovich was (is?) a builder of well regarded fishing boats. Some other builder bought one, used it to make a mold, and sold boats that ended up being derisively called Rybobitches :rolleyes: I think in some states and perhaps federally this is illegal now.

I know from efforts to collect old C&C drawings that drawings and tooling for old designs are more likely to end up in a dumpster than get stolen by other builders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congrats Kim and Bob. Looks like a fun project.

 

I have to say that I love a good flybridge. The view, the open air, etc. we never run the power boat from below. Things you might consider, if you already haven't: wind protection. 16 knots into 10-15 knots is 25-30 apparent, which can really wear you down. A good Venturi wind deflector helps a lot. Also, standing up higher while running can get really tiring as you roll through a wider arc and hang on.

 

Have fun and thanks for sharing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually forgoing inside steering is a thing now with powerboats. You have the flying bridge with good protection and "docking controls" in the aft cockpit. The interior is used for inside things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a lawyer, I like contracts... heck half of my day is writing contracts. But there are just some deals that don't need them. Yacht designers, doctors, lawyers, pretty much if you are paying someone for their opinion you really don't need a contract. If you can't trust them to do the right thing, why would you trust their opinion. On the other hand a boat builder needs more certainty, not just for them, but also for planning things like ordering 20,000lbs of carbon fiber cloth they only need for this one project.

 

My guess, and it is only a guess is that on the four cutter project Bob's conversation with the owner went something like..

 

Buyer - "I want to build four identical, carbon, full keeled cutters"

Bob - "Fantastic, that sounds like an awesome project and I would love to be involved. My design fee is X (or X plus Y per boat).

Buyer - "Damn your design fee, full speed ahead and man the torpedos."

Bob - "I haven't done torpedo launchers in a while, but I can draw a nice pipe, how does that sound?

 

When it came to the yard however I am willing to bet there is a pretty decent contract in place that spells out incremental payments, completion deadlines, title transfer as the boats are worked on, who is liable for insurance, bankruptcy provisions, penalties for late delivery, change order payments.... basically all the things that both parties need to feel comfortable with the deal.

 

The two are very different deals, with different risk and different overhead concerns. If Bob gets stiffed he looses a bit of time and a design fee, but if the yard gets stiffed they have tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in materials and overhead they are going to eat. Bob just moves on to designing the next boat and won't accept a commission from that guy again, the yard is likely headed Tom bankruptcy and receivership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, guys. It sounds like I asked a hypothetical question that has no basis in yacht design reality. The only boat I have ever commissioned is the Left Coast Dart. I called, talked to Jim Lee, sent a downpayment, made payment in full, and got a boat. The design, however, had already been paid for by Jim (I think). We all love your boat and soon- to be- boat, Kim. This is been an interesting education for me and perhaps for others. Let's move on to boat pictures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stumble:

Your synopsis is quite close to the reality, sans the torpedoes though.

 

I have never had a client stiff me. Not really. Maybe kinda, sorta.

I had one Australian client buy study plans from me then have the boat built from them. Must have given him too many drawings. My bad. What really pisses me off is that we went to dinner and I paid!

I had a client, a lawyer, from Guam buy plans to build one, one off semi custom version based on the Valiant 40 hull. The agreement was for one boat only. He took the plans to Taiwan and built the Polaris 43. He did not pay royalties.

 

On the other hand I have been lucky to have a long string of generous and appreciative clients over the years.

 

Turd:

Nice boats, Not fare from what I have in mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now is the time to put some bronze or copper in the hull if you want a groundplane that doesn't look like crap ;)

Don't we need a hull first? de K7IM k

 

(However, it is on my list, ground plane in laminate.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Copper ground plane in a carbon hull would mean some interesting conduction issues.

 

Could just use the whole hull as a ground plane, as it would conduct.

 

Maybe have a strip underwater somewhere with no paint, or is there a conducting paint?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Contracts don't mean much when dealing with snakes, only the lawyer wins in those situations. Better not to deal with snakes.

I can hit a snake with a shovel, apparently that's frowned upon with client reps. When dealing with big corporations, like mines, there are a lot of contract and project management people with serpentine qualities. A well written contract is the only thing you can hit them with

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never had a client stiff me. Not really. Maybe kinda, sorta.

I had one Australian client buy study plans from me then have the boat built from them. Must have given him too many drawings. My bad. What really pisses me off is that we went to dinner and I paid!

I had a client, a lawyer, from Guam buy plans to build one, one off semi custom version based on the Valiant 40 hull. The agreement was for one boat only. He took the plans to Taiwan and built the Polaris 43. He did not pay royalties.

 

Your exception proves the rule. I can think of several boat designers that go to great lengths to make sure no one can copy their work, with good reason. Such as publishing only 3D renderings or photos instead of drawings with enough detail to copy them accurately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a great shame that all designers aren't as generous as Bob is - back in the day the yachting magazines published pages full of lines drawings: nowadays I suspect you're lucky to get a sort of general arrangement or accommodation or sailplan.

 

Oh, and haven't you noticed how people see their own attitudes reflected back at them? Open generous enthusiastic people get a lot of that behaviour in return, whereas angry bitter people see a lot of angry bitter behaviour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 years ago, Mutual Industries made this gorgeous sexy nickel coated carbon fiber, for conduction. It was aerospace stuff. Personally I'd rather have titanium :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I have never had a client stiff me. Not really. Maybe kinda, sorta.

I had one Australian client buy study plans from me then have the boat built from them. Must have given him too many drawings. My bad. What really pisses me off is that we went to dinner and I paid!

I had a client, a lawyer, from Guam buy plans to build one, one off semi custom version based on the Valiant 40 hull. The agreement was for one boat only. He took the plans to Taiwan and built the Polaris 43. He did not pay royalties.

 

Your exception proves the rule. I can think of several boat designers that go to great lengths to make sure no one can copy their work, with good reason. Such as publishing only 3D renderings or photos instead of drawings with enough detail to copy them accurately.

 

I'm pretty sure there is at least one unauthorized copy of one of my designs out there. Trouble is, it is far away and not worth the trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I have never had a client stiff me. Not really. Maybe kinda, sorta.

I had one Australian client buy study plans from me then have the boat built from them. Must have given him too many drawings. My bad. What really pisses me off is that we went to dinner and I paid!

I had a client, a lawyer, from Guam buy plans to build one, one off semi custom version based on the Valiant 40 hull. The agreement was for one boat only. He took the plans to Taiwan and built the Polaris 43. He did not pay royalties.

Your exception proves the rule. I can think of several boat designers that go to great lengths to make sure no one can copy their work, with good reason. Such as publishing only 3D renderings or photos instead of drawings with enough detail to copy them accurately.

I'm pretty sure there is at least one unauthorized copy of one of my designs out there. Trouble is, it is far away and not worth the trouble.
IMO most of the people who would have the money to pay for design services in the first place also want the support that comes with the real deal. People who buy knock off shit are usually not a prospective customer anyway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was a kid I could count on at least four if not six quality yachting mags a month. For me the high light of each mag was the "design section". I can remember seeing my first Bill Garden design in a SEA magazine design section. It was titled "A Garden Cruiser". I was a kid and I thought, "WTF is a Garden cruiser?" "Is it a cruiser you cruise around your garden in?" I cut out those designs usually including sail plans, layouts, deck plans and very often hull lines. That's how I learned to draw. Those old designers were not afraid to publish their work and I am not afraid to publish my work.

HAWKconstructionpub%20Model%201%20copy_z

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea is to have the mesh inside the laminate, not exposed. For RF, it does not have to touch the water. FYI - carbon or generic fiberglass airplanes have to have metal mesh laminated under the gelcoat to be certified for IFR flight. Lightning hitting a non-protected fiberglass/carbon airplane will blow it to pieces :o

Copper ground plane in a carbon hull would mean some interesting conduction issues.

Could just use the whole hull as a ground plane, as it would conduct.

Maybe have a strip underwater somewhere with no paint, or is there a conducting paint?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have ground planes in the CF cutters. I will get the details for you. I think I may have a photo. I'll check.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I have never had a client stiff me. Not really. Maybe kinda, sorta.

I had one Australian client buy study plans from me then have the boat built from them. Must have given him too many drawings. My bad. What really pisses me off is that we went to dinner and I paid!

I had a client, a lawyer, from Guam buy plans to build one, one off semi custom version based on the Valiant 40 hull. The agreement was for one boat only. He took the plans to Taiwan and built the Polaris 43. He did not pay royalties.

 

Your exception proves the rule. I can think of several boat designers that go to great lengths to make sure no one can copy their work, with good reason. Such as publishing only 3D renderings or photos instead of drawings with enough detail to copy them accurately.

 

 

 

I used to worry about that paradoxical phrase "an exception that proves the rule", until I realised that it comes from the earlier use of the word "prove", as in "proof house" (somewhere that was used for testing equipment), or "proof impression" (a trial run to see if the engraving was looking good). In other words, a test, but not necessarily a test that demonstrates success. For rproving gun barrels see for instance http://www.gunproof.com/index.html

 

But I don't think that in common usage, it's an expression that means anything at all - or at least not what it sounds like it means . . .

 

Language rant over for the day. Stand easy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people just live paranoid lives. Not me.

HAWKINTERIOR%20Model%201%20copy_zps8gnlx

 

Why doesn't that drawing show the 800 pounds of internal lead bricks the owner needed to place all the way aft to get the thing to float in design trim?

 

Bob Perry, King of The Weight Study. Funny Shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO most of the people who would have the money to pay for design services in the first place also want the support that comes with the real deal. People who buy knock off shit are usually not a prospective customer anyway

 

So the consensus here seems to be that intellectual property in general is much ado about nothing? Or does this apply only to boats? The seductive power of simplistic thinking, delivered with sincerity and "charismatic charm", can be highly misleading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea is to have the mesh inside the laminate, not exposed. For RF, it does not have to touch the water. FYI - carbon or generic fiberglass airplanes have to have metal mesh laminated under the gelcoat to be certified for IFR flight. Lightning hitting a non-protected fiberglass/carbon airplane will blow it to pieces :o

 

Copper ground plane in a carbon hull would mean some interesting conduction issues.

Could just use the whole hull as a ground plane, as it would conduct.

Maybe have a strip underwater somewhere with no paint, or is there a conducting paint?

 

I have had HF installations on a number of vessels. Let's not bug Bob with this. I am well versed in how to do it and have already discussed this stuff with Jim Betts when he was asking about how to do it on the cutters. When the time comes Jim and I will revisit the issues. Cheers!

 

(But I do appreciate that you were thinking to bring it up. 73.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ed:

I found the comment unintelligible.

stealth%20chick%20layout_zpslartg18r.jpg

oo yes baby! I'll take one of those please . . . Like muchly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ed:

That is STEALTH CHICKEN and it may be for sale. It's one of the nicest boats I have designed. Fast and handsome. Very nice below as you can see from my drawing.

Spike and I went down for the launching. My client gave me his Gull Wing Mercedes to drive for the weekend. Spike really liked that. I must say that it intimidated me. I was afraid to park it. Those doors!

Looking back it was a great time with a great boat and wonderful people.

 

stealth%20chicken%202_zpsydetlsvv.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The idea is to have the mesh inside the laminate, not exposed. For RF, it does not have to touch the water. FYI - carbon or generic fiberglass airplanes have to have metal mesh laminated under the gelcoat to be certified for IFR flight. Lightning hitting a non-protected fiberglass/carbon airplane will blow it to pieces :o

Copper ground plane in a carbon hull would mean some interesting conduction issues.

Could just use the whole hull as a ground plane, as it would conduct.

Maybe have a strip underwater somewhere with no paint, or is there a conducting paint?

I have had HF installations on a number of vessels. Let's not bug Bob with this. I am well versed in how to do it and have already discussed this stuff with Jim Betts when he was asking about how to do it on the cutters. When the time comes Jim and I will revisit the issues. Cheers!

 

(But I do appreciate that you were thinking to bring it up. 73.)

 

When comes the time I'll be interested in your setup. I suspect that not that many people know how to do it well or at least as well as a Ham would.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I have never had a client stiff me. Not really. Maybe kinda, sorta.

I had one Australian client buy study plans from me then have the boat built from them. Must have given him too many drawings. My bad. What really pisses me off is that we went to dinner and I paid!

I had a client, a lawyer, from Guam buy plans to build one, one off semi custom version based on the Valiant 40 hull. The agreement was for one boat only. He took the plans to Taiwan and built the Polaris 43. He did not pay royalties.

 

Your exception proves the rule. I can think of several boat designers that go to great lengths to make sure no one can copy their work, with good reason. Such as publishing only 3D renderings or photos instead of drawings with enough detail to copy them accurately.

 

 

 

I used to worry about that paradoxical phrase "an exception that proves the rule", until I realised that it comes from the earlier use of the word "prove", as in "proof house" (somewhere that was used for testing equipment), or "proof impression" (a trial run to see if the engraving was looking good). In other words, a test, but not necessarily a test that demonstrates success. For rproving gun barrels see for instance http://www.gunproof.com/index.html

 

But I don't think that in common usage, it's an expression that means anything at all - or at least not what it sounds like it means . . .

 

Language rant over for the day. Stand easy.

 

 

Hear, hear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty much.

There is so little money to be made - if any - stealing boat designs I can't see worrying about it. I bet there are plenty of molds and tooling around free for the taking if you promise not to bring them back.

If this was the 1970s and someone was running off your design by the hundreds, different story. My boat is one of about 200 of my version with plenty more MK IIs and MK IIIs around.

In 2017 C&C sold a grand total of how many 30s so far in 2-3 years - 10? Wow, you could splash one of those and sell..........none.

 

IMO most of the people who would have the money to pay for design services in the first place also want the support that comes with the real deal. People who buy knock off shit are usually not a prospective customer anyway


So the consensus here seems to be that intellectual property in general is much ado about nothing? Or does this apply only to boats? The seductive power of simplistic thinking, delivered with sincerity and "charismatic charm", can be highly misleading.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kent:

Come on out. You can stay at the shack. I'll drive you to Anacortes. I was telling Kim today that it's like a graveyard of tooling and old boats. In some ways it's tragic. There is WALL STREET DUCK, a famous racer of its time, just rotting away.

It is depressing how many boats are left to die from neglect. And tooling? Don't even get me started on tooling. There are molds everywhere, like ancient elephants dying of dehydration in the sun.

 

Sorry, I forgot. If drawings terrify you you had better run for the hills.

 

Icon%20accom%20plan_zps7d5t0cdy.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I forgot. If drawings terrify you you had better run for the hills.

Hah, wow, that's some seriously convoluted thinking right there. If you're so fearless about this, how about posting all the final CAD files for the carbon cutters or FRANCIS LEE or kdh's QUAIL?

 

P.S. This version of your ICON drawing is easier to read - click to magnify:

 

http://i950.photobucket.com/albums/ad347/rhpbob/Icon%20accom%20plan_zps7d5t0cdy.jpg~original

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In this instance (a custom design) Bob would typically own the design. Yes, for 2nd guy you could and would charge somewhat less IF #2 wanted the exact same design. He never does.

 

It's always gonna be a variation on the initial design. And once you start changing one thing you have to change lots more. "I just want 100 miles more range. And a different set of berths for the grandkids." So you need a bit more hull volume for the extra fuel and a few inches more beam for the cabin with twin bunks. Pretty soon it's a new bloody boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea is to have the mesh inside the laminate, not exposed. For RF, it does not have to touch the water. FYI - carbon or generic fiberglass airplanes have to have metal mesh laminated under the gelcoat to be certified for IFR flight. Lightning hitting a non-protected fiberglass/carbon airplane will blow it to pieces :o

Copper ground plane in a carbon hull would mean some interesting conduction issues.

 

Could just use the whole hull as a ground plane, as it would conduct.

 

Maybe have a strip underwater somewhere with no paint, or is there a conducting paint?

 

Interesting about the copper mesh in CF airplanes. I just looked up the resistance of CF and it seems to be somewhere between 1x and 5X that of copper. This would probably be decent for a submerged capacitive groundplane, as long as you could properly couple the radio / tuner ground to it (probably via a large-area copper mesh buried in the laminate). Adding a metallic RF/seawater ground via the saildrive would probably be a good thing, as you can't have too much RF ground. You would probably want a DC blocking capacitor for this connection.

 

I can see that with 5X the resistance, the CF wouldn't do too well against a lightning strike -- too much resistive heating.

 

(I say "probably" a lot when I'm doing this kind of handwaving back-of-the-envelope guesswork.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I have never had a client stiff me. Not really. Maybe kinda, sorta.

I had one Australian client buy study plans from me then have the boat built from them. Must have given him too many drawings. My bad. What really pisses me off is that we went to dinner and I paid!

I had a client, a lawyer, from Guam buy plans to build one, one off semi custom version based on the Valiant 40 hull. The agreement was for one boat only. He took the plans to Taiwan and built the Polaris 43. He did not pay royalties.

 

Your exception proves the rule. I can think of several boat designers that go to great lengths to make sure no one can copy their work, with good reason. Such as publishing only 3D renderings or photos instead of drawings with enough detail to copy them accurately.

 

 

Proa, I think that the exception does prove the rule with the country in question. I have a couple of designer friends who have had similar stories. I hate to generalize about a country, but Bob's story seems familiar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry you are afraid of drawings Proa. I find that odd to say the least. My drawings won't hurt you. Relax. Confront a drawing. Face your fear. In time you can learn that drawings are harmless. They are only drawings.

I have posted countless acad drawings of both Quail and the carbon cutters. Pay attention! Do you want more? Really? More? I'm happy to post them. They are all already here. Research man. It's not that hard.

 

Zonks:

You seem to have it right. I have had custom made suits made for me. (yes, I know, hard to believe but true.) They just don't fit anyone else. Why would anyone want my custom made suit?

Same with custom design.

 

This is really strange, people getting upset about custom yacht designs. Must be a very different world. I think there are more important things to get upset about.

 

Face your fear.

This is really funny. Oooh the drawings, they scare me. It's like fucking Halloween!

LOON%20construct_zpsaapxcvbt.jpg

Mobisle%20deck%20plan_zpsdybfstrz.jpg

YONI%20layout_zpskccitdz0.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ed:

That is STEALTH CHICKEN and it may be for sale. It's one of the nicest boats I have designed. Fast and handsome. Very nice below as you can see from my drawing.

Spike and I went down for the launching. My client gave me his Gull Wing Mercedes to drive for the weekend. Spike really liked that. I must say that it intimidated me. I was afraid to park it. Those doors!

Looking back it was a great time with a great boat and wonderful people.

 

stealth%20chicken%202_zpsydetlsvv.jpg

I always thought this was a beautiful boat. I bought this owners previous boat, but I sure cannot follow on with this boat as much as I would like too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry you are afraid of drawings Proa. I find that odd to say the least. My drawings won't hurt you. Relax. Confront a drawing. Face your fear. In time you can learn that drawings are harmless. They are only drawings.

I have posted countless acad drawings of both Quail and the carbon cutters. Pay attention! Do you want more? Really? More? I'm happy to post them. They are all already here. Research man. It's not that hard.

 

Perry, you are truly off your rocker. Yet another example of what a petty and ridiculous man you can be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... I do know one well known designer who had a bitter fight with a client. ...

 

What were they fighting about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure in the 1970s there was a danger your XYZ teak cruiser design would spawn any number of knockoffs coming from Lee Ho's boatyard and massage company.

There sure are a lot of "almost a Grand Banks" trawlers that poured out of there :rolleyes:

Here in 2017, no one that can afford to build a custom boat or start a boat building company is going to be so marginal they would try and use plans stolen from CA posts or magazine articles. Even if they did, would ANYONE trust any kind of high tech build from an operation that could not even consult a naval architect? Maybe the 345th version of a Westsail with 2 inches of slathered on resin and cloth, but nothing resembling a modern boat.

 

Sorry you are afraid of drawings Proa. I find that odd to say the least. My drawings won't hurt you. Relax. Confront a drawing. Face your fear. In time you can learn that drawings are harmless. They are only drawings.
I have posted countless acad drawings of both Quail and the carbon cutters. Pay attention! Do you want more? Really? More? I'm happy to post them. They are all already here. Research man. It's not that hard.

 

Perry, you are truly off your rocker. Yet another example of what a petty and ridiculous man you can be.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Sorry you are afraid of drawings Proa. I find that odd to say the least. My drawings won't hurt you. Relax. Confront a drawing. Face your fear. In time you can learn that drawings are harmless. They are only drawings.

I have posted countless acad drawings of both Quail and the carbon cutters. Pay attention! Do you want more? Really? More? I'm happy to post them. They are all already here. Research man. It's not that hard.

Perry, you are truly off your rocker. Yet another example of what a petty and ridiculous man you can be.

Just for conversation, how many of your designs are out there actually built and cruising?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Sorry you are afraid of drawings Proa. I find that odd to say the least. My drawings won't hurt you. Relax. Confront a drawing. Face your fear. In time you can learn that drawings are harmless. They are only drawings.

I have posted countless acad drawings of both Quail and the carbon cutters. Pay attention! Do you want more? Really? More? I'm happy to post them. They are all already here. Research man. It's not that hard.

Perry, you are truly off your rocker. Yet another example of what a petty and ridiculous man you can be.

Just for conversation, how many of your designs are out there actually built and cruising?

 

There is the one I xeroxed and made from old resin I found in the shed :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tom:

I'm not sure what the fight was over. I had met the client while he was looking for a designer and I did not think I could work with him. He wanted too much control,over design elements.

 

One of the problems we have with the SAILING reviews today is that we seldom get good, designer produced drawings any more. We get slick and colorful 3D "renderings" and not the good ones that Rasper produces. They are often just plain wrong and sometimes inconsistent. Some are fine. But I would prefer designer drawings, the standard drawings. Seeing exactly what the designer drew gives me a better understanding of the boat. But problem is that some people can't read a drawing while they can imagine a boat from a 3D rendering. In a perfect world I'd get drawings and renderings.

 

I reviewed a Kevin Dibley. NZ designer, a couple of months ago. Kevin sent me an entire set of plans.

If I am asked to do a review of a big Euro builder new boat most likely I will never see anything from the designer. Just advertising material.

 

Quail's layout:

KDHLayout13-11-11-15x82_zpsd3b226dc.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I am sure in the 1970s there was a danger your XYZ teak cruiser design would spawn any number of knockoffs coming from Lee Ho's boatyard and massage company.

 

 

The Bermuda 30, built by Cheoy Lee, was described in their brochure as a "modified Herreshoff" design. I think the general opinion was that it was patterned after the H-28. But it wasn't an H-28, being 2 feet longer. But maybe, it was designed by simply expanding the table of offsets (which had been published). Did LFH deserve a royalty? Hardly any boat is designed without reference to some previous boat.

 

 

maxresdefault.jpg

 

 

These days, you can walk around a boat with camera, taking pictures from all angles, and have have software digest the photos and draw the lines. Or more likely, a designer will draw something in CAD that he thinks is close, and tweak to death looking at the pictures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tom:

I'm not sure what the fight was over. I had met the client while he was looking for a designer and I did not think I could work with him. He wanted too much control,over design elements.

 

...

 

 

I'm curious what you mean by this. Did he want you to design something you did not want to create? Or want you to do it in a way you didn't want to do? Or just cluelessly ask you to do two incompatible things at once? Or what?

 

I have seen some of those lousy advertising renderings you talk about. Companies have spent advertising dollars to make sure I saw them. I look at them and think, "Don't these people know Rasputin exists?" So your frustration extends even to the consumer market and to people like me who can't tell anything from a lines drawing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I am sure in the 1970s there was a danger your XYZ teak cruiser design would spawn any number of knockoffs coming from Lee Ho's boatyard and massage company.

 

The Bermuda 30, built by Cheoy Lee, was described in their brochure as a "modified Herreshoff" design. I think the general opinion was that it was patterned after the H-28. But it wasn't an H-28, being 2 feet longer. But maybe, it was designed by simply expanding the table of offsets (which had been published). Did LFH deserve a royalty? Hardly any boat is designed without reference to some previous boat.

 

 

maxresdefault.jpg

 

 

These days, you can walk around a boat with camera, taking pictures from all angles, and have have software digest the photos and draw the lines. Or more likely, a designer will draw something in CAD that he thinks is close, and tweak to death looking at the pictures.

Cheoy Lee built a few wood Rozinantes, and splashed a mold. Not sure if or how many they built in glass. Hull and deck mold were sold to Kenner Boats in Louisiana. IDK if LFH ever received royalties...I suspect he never gave the okay to build in fiberglass. Similar may have occurred with H-28/Ber30.

I suspect the copying/splashing happened more often in the early days of fiberglass building than now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tom:

The conflict was over what art of the design I would be able to control. When the guy said that he'd have an interior designer do the interior, I bristled. " I do my interiors. I'm good at it."

 

I have been sent renderings where there is no standing rigging shown. Clearly some of the renderings have been produced by someone who does not sail. If I had a buck for every time I've studied a rendering and said,
"WTF is that?" I could take us both out for a nice lunch. You don't get that with Rasper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tom:

The conflict was over what art of the design I would be able to control. When the guy said that he'd have an interior designer do the interior, I bristled. " I do my interiors. I'm good at it."

 

I have been sent renderings where there is no standing rigging shown. Clearly some of the renderings have been produced by someone who does not sail. If I had a buck for every time I've studied a rendering and said,

"WTF is that?" I could take us both out for a nice lunch. You don't get that with Rasper.

This is done with airplanes. This is called "buying a green airplane" because of the green zinc chromate finish on the raw aluminum and then you go to a shop that does the interior for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Tom:

The conflict was over what art of the design I would be able to control. When the guy said that he'd have an interior designer do the interior, I bristled. " I do my interiors. I'm good at it."

 

I have been sent renderings where there is no standing rigging shown. Clearly some of the renderings have been produced by someone who does not sail. If I had a buck for every time I've studied a rendering and said,

"WTF is that?" I could take us both out for a nice lunch. You don't get that with Rasper.

This is done with airplanes. This is called "buying a green airplane" because of the green zinc chromate finish on the raw aluminum and then you go to a shop that does the interior for you.
Used to be done with cars. Racers would buy what was called a 'body in white' , and fit it out with a cage and their own motor and suspension for racing Stock cars, TransAm road-racing, and Pro-Stock drag racing. Saved the cost and trouble of buying a completed car and stripping the interior and undercoating, etc off it. Now the cars are built with tube frames and hand-made lightweight body panels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my line of work, machine design, drawings are becoming less and less important. While I produce drawings almost daily, I haven't put pencil to mylar in close to 30 years. The purchasing guys use them for quoting, but the people who actually make the parts just use the CAD files. There are some companies who will produce parts without ever once looking at the drawing.

 

And you know what? things almost always fit together perfectly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My last hand drawn drawings are is dated 1999. They are beautiful. I sent them to the yard and got a note back basically saying, "What do expect us to do with those?" That's the day I learned acad.

 

I used to plot out full size, mylar patterns for the hull so no lofting was needed. There was a time when that was "high tech".

Now I just send a digital file that goes straight to the CNC machine. I haven't seen anything "lofted" in years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha, my last hand drawing for production was in 2002 (construction plan), and I've up-revised another plan set for sale (using time honored sepia mylar) after that. I sent that plan set off to a customer only a few years ag0 (5, 6,7 year? losing track) Crazy! For dinghy lines plans I've delivered them as everything from table of offsets/drawing, to plate layouts in DXF, to full size plots.

The last set of lines I actually final faired by hand, that goes back to a few years earlier--1996 or 1997. That was on mylar (the only lines I ever did on mylar amazingly enough; all the previous were on K&E or Clearprint vellum), and it never got built :-(

 

In commercial work, I've seen so many different approaches. Some of the ferries I designed, took the IGES files, except one yard took my plate layouts. Some of the yards down south also did that, but one of them needed 2D lines in autocad.

 

In the workboats, the last set of lines we delivered were actually 2D autocad because their lofting company wanted to do their own lofting anyway. We sometimes get 2D "corrected" lofted lines back. Not all of our boats are fully developable so what the yard chooses to do has to work within their software and build strategy, (Tribon, or Foran, or Ship Constructor, or Nupas or whathaveyou). In some cases they've taken native Rhino or ProSurf files and gone from them directly to their own importing to the other software.

The handoff from design office to yard, with respect to these details, is ever-evolving, at least in my experience.

I should also note that in commercial or even big yacht work, sometimes the yard only gets PDF. That may seem crazy, but there are contracts....and philosophies, and responsibilities. This may seem crazy but again, the modeling is not typically done straight from the tools used at contract design level and the yard will 3D model the whole freaking ship, in their own software, so Autocad doesn't even help because they have to build it from scratch anyway.

I like hearing what Bob does because it is another set of approaches and more rather than less options is good to be aware of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still do hand drawings when I want something made at a local fabrication shop. They do beautiful work. They don't do CAD, they want drawings.

Glen Henderson sent the spar maker a detailed drawing for the SR-27 mast and boom. What he got back bore no relation to the drawing, they never even looked at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I walked into one well known builder's shop to look at a new 56'er he said, "You're going to like what I did with the bow." I thought, "Oh fuck!"

Next project I sent him full size mylars for the hull and then sent him bow waterlines on 6" spacing along with profile so that this time he had no room to improvise.

When I got to the shop, there in the corner was my thick roll of mylar bow patterns. They looked like they had never been unrolled. But the bow came out fine.

Sometimes you just have to HTFU and get on with the job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites