Gartside design #160, built by Eric Jespersen.



Thread here: http://forum.woodenb...wl-Construction
More pics here:
Posted 09 November 2012 - 02:33 PM



Posted 09 November 2012 - 02:51 PM
Posted 09 November 2012 - 02:54 PM
Posted 09 November 2012 - 03:32 PM
Posted 09 November 2012 - 04:03 PM
Posted 09 November 2012 - 04:31 PM
That squared off trailing edge to the keel looks a bit on the slow side to me.
Posted 09 November 2012 - 06:17 PM
Posted 09 November 2012 - 08:04 PM
Posted 09 November 2012 - 08:06 PM
This thread has been around on the Woodenboat forum, but the owner just posted the launch pictures and they are so pretty I thought I'd post them here as well.
Gartside design #160, built by Eric Jespersen.
Thread here: http://forum.woodenb...wl-Construction
Posted 10 November 2012 - 12:25 AM
Posted 10 November 2012 - 03:09 AM
I like the hull deadlights... If the hull had been painted a darker color they would not be so noticeable.
Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:12 PM
I am always impressed with Jesperson's work. Always top notch. But the leading edge of the keel, I never though a keel should be a blunt instrument.
Posted 10 November 2012 - 03:40 PM
Poor little green boat with ugly hull "windows". Sitting there in the marina it reminds me of a little kid being sent off to school in an ugly sweater his aunt knitted. ,": Do I have to wear this?"
It would have looked so much nicer without those windows.
Posted 10 November 2012 - 04:51 PM
Posted 10 November 2012 - 05:34 PM
canoeyawl.jpg 145.51K
59 downloads
Posted 10 November 2012 - 06:00 PM
Posted 10 November 2012 - 06:02 PM
Posted 10 November 2012 - 09:19 PM
I am always impressed with Jesperson's work. Always top notch. But the leading edge of the keel, I never though a keel should be a blunt instrument.
Posted 10 November 2012 - 11:05 PM
Posted 10 November 2012 - 11:49 PM
Posted 11 November 2012 - 12:10 AM
Posted 11 November 2012 - 12:32 AM
I am always impressed with Jesperson's work. Always top notch. But the leading edge of the keel, I never though a keel should be a blunt instrument.
Ii looks like the ballast is cast in a different shape from what is in the drawing.
Posted 11 November 2012 - 01:02 AM
Semi:
That's just a profile view of the casting and that may have changed a bit but the problem lies in the sectional shape to leading and trailing edges. I know Eric Jesperen quite well. This is a not a shape that Eric would have come up with on his own. I have a hard time even imagining Eric building that shape.
Posted 11 November 2012 - 06:00 PM
I love them. I had a sail on a Hinckley Pilot 35 (woodie) and the owner gave me one hell of a good lesson on what that little stick can do. We anchored under sail striking the mizzen after all the other sails. She tracked astern on the rode and mizzen sail. The same for departure it went up first keeping us head to the wind, then the main, anchor up and jib to follow.
Posted 12 November 2012 - 10:25 AM
Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:17 PM

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:44 PM
Seriously, who buys a gorgeous boat like that and gives it such a dumb name??
On the topic boat - like the boat, hull windows have got to go. And that tiny little bit of powderhorn in the sheer at the stern would bother me. Either have none, or make a statement.
Posted 13 November 2012 - 01:00 AM
Posted 13 November 2012 - 01:06 AM
Not big on the name either, Brodie.
Posted 13 November 2012 - 01:12 AM
Brodie:
I think you have to have that slight powderhorn in the stern of pretty much any double ender. The exception would be a boat like Kim's SLIVER, i.e. a very narrow boat. If you don't you will get exagerated spring in the stern. The boat will look like a Mallard in heat.
Posted 13 November 2012 - 02:58 AM
Posted 13 November 2012 - 03:36 AM
Posted 13 November 2012 - 02:30 PM
Nice boat but I'm not keen on all that camber in the cabin top. I woiuld have a hard time standing on that.
Posted 13 November 2012 - 02:52 PM
Posted 13 November 2012 - 04:15 PM
Posted 13 November 2012 - 04:29 PM
The camber to my eye is the most glaring flaw and an ankle twister, way overdone almost to the point of being cartoonish....but to each his own....
Posted 13 November 2012 - 04:56 PM
Posted 17 November 2012 - 03:44 AM
Posted 17 November 2012 - 04:07 AM
Cap10:
Before the days of computer generated lines and 3d modelling you could draw a 3D perspective by hand if you wanted to go to that trouble and it was an arduous chore to do it accutately. Or, you could just teach your eye over time to adjust shapes in 2D to translate the the desired shape in 3D. There are a few rules of thumnb that I used, one being that sheer on the actual boat will always appear flatter than the sheer on the drawing. Now to what degree flatter? There lies the problem and it takes an experienced eye to choose the right sheer. Some times I got it right. I look at the work of a lot of other designers and I think that they have no clue as to that correlation. But the good designers figured it out. I was having my lines rendered in 3D as early as 1974. The Valiant 40 lines were rendered in 3D only after I was committed to that shape.
Yes, I have gone back and reproduced my hand drawn lines on the computer. But I tried to stay faithful to the original shape and ignore the impulse to "correct" the shape. I did this with the Nordic 44. Here is the sail plan. The hull lines are reproduced in my book.
Posted 17 November 2012 - 04:52 AM
Posted 17 November 2012 - 05:07 AM
Slightly off topic - and not a sailboat - but I thought the folks here would like this since we were talking about sheerlines and ducks. And the boat has an interesting story.
Valley Sea Kayaks Anas Acuta - 17'2" x 20" This one (mine) built 2004. The Anas was the first boat Valley built starting back in 1973 and it is still in production, giving it the longest production run of any kayak (that held a lot of weight for me when I was looking for a kayak). Except for the shape of the deck around the cockpit, the deck rigging, and of course the fact that it is fiberglass, this boat is essentially an exact copy of an East Greenland skin-on-frame kayak. The boat is very low volume, and with the chines it carves turns like no other kayak, the only way I can describe it is that it's like skiing, as soon as you put pressure on an edge, the boat just turns. I drive tour customers crazy because they have no idea how I am steering the boat. "Where's the rudder?" They don't like it when I tell them the boat doesn't have a rudder, just a retractable skeg to counteract weathercocking. Because of the large amount of rocker the boat isn't terribly fast but it is rock solid in big waves and surfs very easily.
The pointy stern was a feature of many East Greenland kayaks. I'm not sure if it had any purpose. At any rate, 'Anas Acuta', which is the model name of the boat, is the Latin (scientific) name for the pintail duck - which brings me back to why I thought of the kayak when we were discussing sheerlines and pointy sterns. (Valley also makes a round-bilge version called a Pintail) This is obviously not anything even close to a planar sheer and is a very skinny boat but it is interesting to see how much sheer there still is.
Color scheme on this one mimics the Blue Angels. I got lucky, this was a stock boat!
Posted 17 November 2012 - 01:13 PM
Posted 17 November 2012 - 05:04 PM
Cap10:
Before the days of computer generated lines and 3d modelling you could draw a 3D perspective by hand if you wanted to go to that trouble and it was an arduous chore to do it accutately. Or, you could just teach your eye over time to adjust shapes in 2D to translate the the desired shape in 3D. There are a few rules of thumnb that I used, one being that sheer on the actual boat will always appear flatter than the sheer on the drawing. Now to what degree flatter? There lies the problem and it takes an experienced eye to choose the right sheer. Some times I got it right. I look at the work of a lot of other designers and I think that they have no clue as to that correlation. But the good designers figured it out. I was having my lines rendered in 3D as early as 1974. The Valiant 40 lines were rendered in 3D only after I was committed to that shape.
Yes, I have gone back and reproduced my hand drawn lines on the computer. But I tried to stay faithful to the original shape and ignore the impulse to "correct" the shape. I did this with the Nordic 44. Here is the sail plan. The hull lines are reproduced in my book.
Posted 17 November 2012 - 06:25 PM
Thank you Olaf for your kind words, its nice someone noticed.....
Posted 30 November 2012 - 09:07 PM

Posted 30 November 2012 - 11:59 PM
OK, I'm catching up. I love this yawl. But, what is with that keel and rudder? Yikes! Given what we now know about getting a boat to move through the water, why built that now??
Posted 01 December 2012 - 01:18 AM
Posted 01 December 2012 - 02:55 AM
You nailed it. That's gotta be it.I know the reason for those shapes. The designer wanted it to suck. That can be the only answer.
" I sure as hell don't need no NACA foils bullshit. I want this shape. It sucks and that's exactly what I want. Suckage!"
I'm tired of being Mr. Nice Guy all the time.
Posted 01 December 2012 - 10:52 AM
I know the reason for those shapes. The designer wanted it to suck. That can be the only answer.
" I sure as hell don't need no NACA foils bullshit. I want this shape. It sucks and that's exactly what I want. Suckage!"
I'm tired of being Mr. Nice Guy all the time.
Posted 01 December 2012 - 12:41 PM
I know the reason for those shapes. The designer wanted it to suck. That can be the only answer.
" I sure as hell don't need no NACA foils bullshit. I want this shape. It sucks and that's exactly what I want. Suckage!"
I'm tired of being Mr. Nice Guy all the time.
Which leads me to wonder...
If some clever designer took this boat and rectified the problems below the water line, it would convert it from a 4ksb to a __ksb.
Fill in the blank.
Posted 01 December 2012 - 01:39 PM
Posted 01 December 2012 - 01:42 PM
I sailed a ketch, who's mizzen was so small one would have called her a yawl if you didn't know where the rudder was.
Posted 01 December 2012 - 05:24 PM
Posted 01 December 2012 - 11:37 PM
Posted 14 December 2012 - 04:02 PM
Posted 17 December 2012 - 02:53 AM
I never knew it was a matter of religion and had never heard anything other than mast position relative to rudder post being the difference, but if you two guys say so, I'm going to guess I have heard wrong. Learned something new!
Posted 19 December 2012 - 05:28 PM
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users