Jump to content

Heavier displacement = safer in storms?


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, accnick said:
4 hours ago, loneshark64 said:

A bit too much tumblehome there, thanks.

I thought those were IOR beam bumps. They certainly create hollows on either side.

Is Stephen Jones now working as a cosmetic surgeon?

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 595
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It is sad, nay, pathetic, to see the SA nattering nabobs of negativity attempt to quash the adventuring spirit of this young Slocum with their so-called "conventional wisdom."  As the OP has demonstra

I've been following along until now but with the epropulsion and lithium in the bilge turn, I'm out.  You're either a troll or one of those people who ask for advice only to argue about why you s

You guys are getting soft. New guy with zero prior posts starts a thread saying he's boat shopping to sail from the UK to Patagonia. No one thinks this is a troll? 

Posted Images

4 hours ago, accnick said:

I thought those were IOR beam bumps. They certainly create hollows on either side.

More a bustle than beam bumps I think.

Radically increases the after girth.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

AFAIK this one sets that particular standard.

Kim Kardashian Butt by marloesvanderberg on DeviantArt

How anyone, of any persuasion, in any context, can think that’s “right” or “OK” or even “good” is beyond me.

Wait, it’s a prank, isn’t it?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Black Sox said:

How anyone, of any persuasion, in any context, can think that’s “right” or “OK” or even “good” is beyond me.

Wait, it’s a prank, isn’t it?

You are a sheltered white boy, aren't you? No, she isn't a prank, she is quite the fashion in quite a few circles. Google "thicc" for more details

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Max Rockatansky said:

You are a sheltered white boy, aren't you? No, she isn't a prank, she is quite the fashion in quite a few circles

Whatever about her fashion choices, those are what they are, but I was only referring to the body shape.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Max Rockatansky said:

So was I.

I bring you Marie Antoinette.  Thicc, back in her day.  And today.

But the photo above looks like a body mod, or photoshop?  (Proportions are very odd.)

What’s old is new again.

Anyway, back to trout fishing.  I’m worried this thread is about to be hijacked and derailed by the “politicians”!  :-) :-)

FDB55503-A295-4181-B452-C938488CE057.jpeg

93D4F6E5-F1C1-4DDA-8A2B-3A0E6856CF4A.jpeg

Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a gal strutting around the Los Cabos airport in a stretch skin tight dress with a huge, square man made ass. Not kidding on the square, no idea how in the hell...

She was looking to make sure she was being looked at. Not certain the looks were in admiration.

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRbY9tJSDNd1Ow3OV0VkvM

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/9/2021 at 12:25 AM, rustylaru said:

Are there other downsides to the sig 100 besides the required bulkhead space to mount it?

I don't know - not that I can see, really - it's real heat, as in it will dry the cabin out, it's economical, it's small.  I guess you can say that any open flame is dangerous but other than that I don't know what there is against it.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, low bum said:

I don't know - not that I can see, really - it's real heat, as in it will dry the cabin out, it's economical, it's small.  I guess you can say that any open flame is dangerous but other than that I don't know what there is against it.  

I put in a Sig 170 (and piped ducting with fans off the chimney to distribute heat a few places).  Might as well go with the max BTUs you can get, was my thinking - we’ve run it for days and weeks at a time.  But I might go for a Refleks next time, or a Dickinson, as the Sigs are no longer made.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jud - s/v Sputnik said:

I put in a Sig 170 (and piped ducting with fans off the chimney to distribute heat a few places).  Might as well go with the max BTUs you can get, was my thinking - we’ve run it for days and weeks at a time.  But I might go for a Refleks next time, or a Dickinson, as the Sigs are no longer made.

Thanks, didn't know they were d/c'd.  I still see them for sale.  Might ought to buy one before they become unobtainium like Origo alcohol stoves.  God help us if the van lifers discover them.  Just try to buy a two burner Origo now - I've seen them go for $800 after a bidding war.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/10/2021 at 10:59 AM, Black Sox said:

How anyone, of any persuasion, in any context, can think that’s “right” or “OK” or even “good” is beyond me.

Wait, it’s a prank, isn’t it?

As always, blame lies in rating system.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

A stove that could burn both liquid and solid fuel would be a good stove to have. Anchored in the middle of nowhere you could use wood. You could buy kerosene, diesel, alcohol, coal, charcoal. You could adapt to the widest variety of settings. I don't want to sail up the Amazon before realising that they don't have diesel in the jungle.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ysignal said:

A stove that could burn both liquid and solid fuel would be a good stove to have. Anchored in the middle of nowhere you could use wood. You could buy kerosene, diesel, alcohol, coal, charcoal. You could adapt to the widest variety of settings. I don't want to sail up the Amazon before realising that they don't have diesel.

 

I very much doubt there is any place in the world where it is cold enough to run the heater but you can't buy kerosene and you can't buy diesel.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, mckenzie.keith said:

I very much doubt there is any place in the world where it is cold enough to run the heater but you can't buy kerosene and you can't buy diesel.

Well two spring to mind. But they don't have wood either. Can you burn polar bears and penguins?

If you sailed up the Nile you might get a nasty surprise. Although thinking about it the Sahara also doesn't have trees.

There are remote locales with trees and no shops. Not the massive areas that "places in the world" implies but still places where the nearest source of diesel is far further away than some trees.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ysignal said:

Well two spring to mind. But they don't have wood either. Can you burn polar bears and penguins?

If you sailed up the Nile you might get a nasty surprise. Although thinking about it the Sahara also doesn't have trees.

There are remote locales with trees and no shops. Not the massive areas that "places in the world" implies but still places where the nearest source of diesel is far further away than some trees.

Well, OK. If you are going up into the very high latitudes, yes. Also if you cross the Sahara with your boat.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, mckenzie.keith said:

Well, OK. If you are going up into the very high latitudes, yes. Also if you cross the Sahara with your boat.

Lack of heating fuel for boat and Sahara or Amazon. That is a combo that I haven't thought about. Now that I have done that, I won't be wasting more thoughts to that.

"Within the Amazon Basin, the average temperature is 27.9 °C during the dry season and 25.8 °C during the rainy season." "The Sahara Desert is one of the driest and hottest regions of the world..."

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Upp3 said:

Lack of heating fuel for boat and Sahara or Amazon. That is a combo that I haven't thought about. Now that I have done that, I won't be wasting more thoughts to that.

"Within the Amazon Basin, the average temperature is 27.9 °C during the dry season and 25.8 °C during the rainy season." "The Sahara Desert is one of the driest and hottest regions of the world..."

 

womanyellingcat-940x480 (1).jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ysignal said:

A stove that could burn both liquid and solid fuel would be a good stove to have. Anchored in the middle of nowhere you could use wood. You could buy kerosene, diesel, alcohol, coal, charcoal. You could adapt to the widest variety of settings. I don't want to sail up the Amazon before realising that they don't have diesel in the jungle.

please, never stop posting.

  • Like 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ysignal said:

A stove that could burn both liquid and solid fuel would be a good stove to have. Anchored in the middle of nowhere you could use wood. You could buy kerosene, diesel, alcohol, coal, charcoal. You could adapt to the widest variety of settings. I don't want to sail up the Amazon before realising that they don't have diesel in the jungle.

I think you'd find A/C more valuable there than a heater.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ysignal said:

but still places where the nearest source of diesel is far further away than some trees.

I have no diesel at my house. The nearest diesel is at least 5 miles away. Maybe more. But I am surrounded by trees. So I guess that my house qualifies according to your criterion that diesel is farther than the nearest trees.

But what I meant was that diesel or kerosene would be available intermittently so that you could replenish your supply from time to time so you don't run out. People who live in places where they need heat will always have diesel or kerosene available even if they are poor. I don't mean everyone can afford it. I just mean there will be some place to buy it. But if you go to truly remote places, that is different. You will have to bring your supply with you.

From the time you cut down a tree to when it is good for burning can easily be a year. It is very hard to get a good fire going with green wood.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, ysignal said:

A stove that could burn both liquid and solid fuel would be a good stove to have. Anchored in the middle of nowhere you could use wood. You could buy kerosene, diesel, alcohol, coal, charcoal. You could adapt to the widest variety of settings. I don't want to sail up the Amazon before realising that they don't have diesel in the jungle.

 

This is pure gold.  Hopefully you'll have wikipedia on your hand cranked computer and can research diesel availability in the Amazon basin.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

8 hours ago, low bum said:

This is pure gold.  Hopefully you'll have wikipedia on your hand cranked computer and can research diesel availability in the Amazon basin.

Well I'll have solar power too in order to be able to charge my laptop without having to find a power socket. In spite of the fact that there probably is one somewhere in the Amazon it's just easier to use the locally available sunlight.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, mckenzie.keith said:

I have no diesel at my house. The nearest diesel is at least 5 miles away. Maybe more. But I am surrounded by trees. So I guess that my house qualifies according to your criterion that diesel is farther than the nearest trees.

But what I meant was that diesel or kerosene would be available intermittently so that you could replenish your supply from time to time so you don't run out. People who live in places where they need heat will always have diesel or kerosene available even if they are poor. I don't mean everyone can afford it. I just mean there will be some place to buy it. But if you go to truly remote places, that is different. You will have to bring your supply with you.

From the time you cut down a tree to when it is good for burning can easily be a year. It is very hard to get a good fire going with green wood.

It actually makes perfect sense.  I know someone who lives aboard their boat, anchored out, and forages firewood from the shore to burn in his heater.  Way cheaper (and in some senses easier since you don’t need to carry heavy jugs of diesel long distance).  Depending on where you are, and how long you’re off-grid, a wood stove could make sense.  (But I wouldn’t want one; dealing with 100% wood heat at home is enough!)

For diesel, indeed, if you planned to live off grid aboard in remoter, colder parts of the world, you’d ship a barrel of diesel aboard (as challenging as that would be).  Best to plan for extra, and ration your use anyway, in case you get stranded somewhere truly remote...(I’ve thought it would be cool to winter aboard amidst the incredible and isolated glacier splendour in Glacier Bay, Alaska...where the stakes could be high but probably not death-temptingly high?)

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Upp3 said:

Lack of heating fuel for boat and Sahara or Amazon. That is a combo that I haven't thought about. Now that I have done that, I won't be wasting more thoughts to that.

 

I just quoted this because I feel like it might be the most underrated comment in the thread.  

On 11/13/2021 at 7:33 AM, low bum said:

Nope.  Just diesel and kero.  Are there any stoves that burn both liquid and solid fuel?  I've never heard of one if there are...

Not so far as I know.  However if I remember correctly Trevor on the Ironbark had two stoves that shared mounting brackets and chimney size.   Swapping solid fuel for liquid as needed.   His solid fuel does wood and coal I think.     

On 11/13/2021 at 11:07 PM, ysignal said:

A stove that could burn both liquid and solid fuel would be a good stove to have. Anchored in the middle of nowhere you could use wood. You could buy kerosene, diesel, alcohol, coal, charcoal. You could adapt to the widest variety of settings. I don't want to sail up the Amazon before realising that they don't have diesel in the jungle.

 

No.  This is a bad idea.  What you want a wood stove to do and a diesel stove to do are different.   The idea of using any fuel is reasonable.  Solved best by two stoves, either independently installed as one friend of mine has done in his old age.  It let's him get the cabin toasty warm through the evening then go to bed with the diesel keeping temperature up.  

Or swappable as I'm planning to do.  I'll most likely install a cheap forced air diesel heater at the same time so I'll effectively have both but can choose for the bulkhead heater.  

That being said the list of places you would want heat inside the boat and also not have fuel available, that you can't top off on food and water runs are small.  For the warm places with wood, cooking on the beach would be simple.   

The main benefit of wood is that I live in an area with abundant wood and I enjoy a wood fire.    Diesel heat wins hands down in the BTUs per volume of fuel and simplicity of use.   4 diesel cans will get you days more of heat vs the same space taken up by firewood.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Fleetwood said:

Shit, they did it for cars with wood and coal in WW II, 70 years ago:

COAL AND WOOD BURNING VEHICLES OF WWII

 

surely the technology has inproved since then!

Supposedly the new ones are eco-friendly - a "closed carbon cycle".  Guaranteed not to hurt baby seals. Just put one in the main salon and power everything from that. And buy a lot of CO detectors. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

World cruising is a very different solid fuel scenario than a coastal sailor with a chainsaw in the garage at home.  If I was really heading out into cold country and wanted to heat with solid fuel, I would use coal.  I've actually heated my house (day in day out, not just Christmas morning) with wood, for decades, and the intense labor involved turning trees into a size that will fit into a stove is pretty enormous.  Taking things like logs and driftwood you find on the beach and going at it with a bow saw or small chainsaw and bucking it down into the tiny little pieces needed for a sailboat wood stove just makes me queasy.  Coal on the other hand - you can get two or three big bags of coal and stow them in a far smaller space than all that wood would take up, and it doesn't have to be worked down.  If it gets soaked, it doesn't matter - it'll dry fast and will burn wet.  Coal is available lots of places, especially in the cold parts of the world.   No shortage from South Carolina to Finland, certainly.  

Diesel still seems like the best answer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, low bum said:

I've actually heated my house (day in day out, not just Christmas morning) with wood, for decades, and the intense labor involved turning trees into a size that will fit into a stove is pretty enormous. 

Really, it depends, here in a properly (370mm or 470mm of straw!) insulated family passive house with a proper wood stove (or furnace to be accurate as the combustion needs to be very hot to be clean and efficient), one cubic metre (0.28 cord) of firewood  per annum will do.

Thus people who build eco-houses here tend to save money by not installing central heating! Lighting a fire once or twice a week when the weather is grey is not an unsurmountable chore.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Panoramix said:

Really, it depends, here in a properly (370mm or 470mm of straw!) insulated family passive house with a proper wood stove (or furnace to be accurate as the combustion needs to be very hot to be clean and efficient), one cubic metre (0.28 cord) of firewood  per annum will do.

Thus people who build eco-houses here tend to save money by not installing central heating! Lighting a fire once or twice a week when the weather is grey is not an unsurmountable chore.

Yes, you can heat a bank vault with a candle.  What this has to do with heating a boat with wood eludes me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, low bum said:

Yes, you can heat a bank vault with a candle.  What this has to do with heating a boat with wood eludes me.

The point is that if it is small and well insulated, you don't need much fuel!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, low bum said:

Didn't say it was clean.  I said it was hot and comes bagged in convenient small lumps.  

I wasn't picking on you. I just can't hear the word coal now without thinking about the phrase "clean coal." All while remembering the sulfur-y smell of burning coal, and the black soot on the snow where I went to college. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Coal is a great, hot fuel but it's filthy. We sailed back to Canada from Liverpool in '62 - I still remember how incredibly grimy that city was with coal smoke residue.

You literally could not touch anything outdoors without getting black dust on you.

Of course that took a few centuries without ever being cleaned to get that way.

It was the worst I saw but most or all English cities were like that. I thought the Parliament buildings were made of grey/black stone - granite or something. When they finally washed them in the 70's - probably for the first time since construction - it was a revelation.

For the Foreseeable Future, U.K. Parliament May Meet in Cyberspace - The  New York Times

Secret 17th Century Door Revealed in Britain's House of Commons | Travel +  Leisure

Link to post
Share on other sites

As somebody mentioned, the appliance to heat a small space is small and easy to get. Maintaining the air, moisture and hence comfort level in a small space where people intend to live, is the hard part. The tiny house craze (nothing new) fascinates me (I've been a design/builder for a lifetime).

I love small spaces but heating them in any normal house like fashion, it just doesn't work. The best I see are seasonal. 

Living on a small boat in the winter? Easy question: It ain't livin' so forgetaboutit. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/3/2021 at 6:41 PM, Panoramix said:

Why?

Boat X has a design total weight of 5,000.  Boat Y has a design total weight of 10,000.  

Add 2,000  of gear and supplies. Boat X is 40% over its design weight. Boat Y is 20% over its design weight.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Howler said:

Boat X has a design total weight of 5,000.  Boat Y has a design total weight of 10,000.  

Add 2,000  of gear and supplies. Boat X is 40% over its design weight. Boat Y is 20% over its design weight.

Doesn't work like this!

That's heavy displacement (for its size) but won't take much weight before behaving like a submarine.

4ec1e042945d190b0f7d0c84a3aa6f6d.jpg

on the other hand a Pogo style boat is light displacement but will carry  lot of weight.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Elegua said:

Supposedly the new ones are eco-friendly - a "closed carbon cycle".  Guaranteed not to hurt baby seals. Just put one in the main salon and power everything from that. And buy a lot of CO detectors. 

All wood is closed-cycle, if you don't burn it to release the CO2 it gets released anyway when it decays. New trees use the CO2 to grow, rinse-repeat.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Panoramix said:

Really, it depends, here in a properly (370mm or 470mm of straw!) insulated family passive house with a proper wood stove (or furnace to be accurate as the combustion needs to be very hot to be clean and efficient), one cubic metre (0.28 cord) of firewood  per annum will do.

Thus people who build eco-houses here tend to save money by not installing central heating! Lighting a fire once or twice a week when the weather is grey is not an unsurmountable chore.

Something tells me the climate there is very different from someplace like Maine where you could possibly go weeks before getting above freezing. There are plenty of old houses in California that were built with no heat too, but not so many in Minnesota ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kris Cringle said:

As somebody mentioned, the appliance to heat a small space is small and easy to get. Maintaining the air, moisture and hence comfort level in a small space where people intend to live, is the hard part. The tiny house craze (nothing new) fascinates me (I've been a design/builder for a lifetime).

I love small spaces but heating them in any normal house like fashion, it just doesn't work. The best I see are seasonal. 

Living on a small boat in the winter? Easy question: It ain't livin' so forgetaboutit. 

 

My biggest issue with boats and winter is rarely, if ever, are sailboats designed so one can get in and out of them without letting all the hot air out of the cabin.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

My biggest issue with boats and winter is rarely, if ever, are sailboats designed so one can get in and out of them without letting all the hot air out of the cabin.

Surely this could be solved by retrofitting a hatch under the cabin sole, so that you don't have to use the opening on top?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The "how much weight can it carry vs displacement?" argument is running into the theory vs practice divide.

Obviously, one could in theory design an extremely light displacement boat that could carry an enormous amount of stuff.  As a practical matter, very light displacement boats are, in general, designed around the objective of sailing fast when lightly loaded, with performance that tends to fall off pretty quickly as weight is added, and heavier displacement boats are, in general, designed around different objectives, that result in them being able to soldier on when heavily loaded.

So, when someone says, "heavy displacement boats are more suited to be loaded up with all the stuff you carry on a long distance cruise," they're talking about the typical heavy displacement boats one finds on the market as compared with the typical light displacement boats one finds on the market, not about theoretical boats.

Someone said that a Pogo could happily carry a lot of payload. I'd like to see some sort of analysis or experience that supports that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, TwoLegged said:

Surely this could be solved by retrofitting a hatch under the cabin sole, so that you don't have to use the opening on top?

You'd need to be sure to fit this hatch with a high quality screen door, to keep out unwelcome sea critters.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Panoramix said:

Really, it depends, here in a properly (370mm or 470mm of straw!) insulated family passive house with a proper wood stove (or furnace to be accurate as the combustion needs to be very hot to be clean and efficient), one cubic metre (0.28 cord) of firewood  per annum will do.

Thus people who build eco-houses here tend to save money by not installing central heating! Lighting a fire once or twice a week when the weather is grey is not an unsurmountable chore.

Some houses are built that way here and as you say, they often do not have central heat.

At least they do not have the typical boilers and furnaces of most existing houses. More often a heat pump is used in 'net zero' houses (12"+ plus wall and ceiling insulation) that are being built in this area. That plus a cheery wood fire (woodstove, pellet stove).

The trouble with these net zero houses houses is the added cost, 20-30% or more, leaves out the average home owner (just the people we need to help!). And another problem: Moisture! 

On the other hand, heat pump tech. has become so efficient at lower temperatures, heat pump installations are on a steep rise. This winter threatens to be an expensive one as fuel oil is likely to increase costs by as much as 50%. The traditional central heat system (fuel oil here) has become optional for an increasing number of homeowners. 

We are one of the most fuel oil dependent states in Maine due largely to home heating older inefficient housing stock and a cold climate (and long miles of driving). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

My biggest issue with boats and winter is rarely, if ever, are sailboats designed so one can get in and out of them without letting all the hot air out of the cabin.

Yes. Airlocks are vital.

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

My biggest issue with boats and winter is rarely, if ever, are sailboats designed so one can get in and out of them without letting all the hot air out of the cabin.

 

37 minutes ago, TwoLegged said:

Surely this could be solved by retrofitting a hatch under the cabin sole, so that you don't have to use the opening on top?

Watching the growing live-aboard phenomena (boats as houses that are going no-where) for decades, I'm always struck by how poorly sailboats are designed to be houses. 

All you have to do is stand under a small covered back porch in the rain with a bag of grocery's, then imagine doing the same at your boat. 

Surely the boats designers could have figured this out. 

895123355_Winterporch.thumb.jpg.b4594710b6726b362035ff6ea309957f.jpg

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On our catamaran because it had a door, stepping inside/outside never let a lot of cold air in. On our monohull it had drop boards and it was slower but because inside air volume was lower, never noticed much effect.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Howler said:
38 minutes ago, TwoLegged said:

Surely this could be solved by retrofitting a hatch under the cabin sole, so that you don't have to use the opening on top?

You'd need to be sure to fit this hatch with a high quality screen door, to keep out unwelcome sea critters.

Are you saying that carboard and sellotape are ruled out?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kris Cringle said:

Watching the growing live-aboard phenomena (boats as houses that are going no-where) for decades, I'm always struck by how poorly sailboats are designed to be houses. 

All you have to do is stand under a small covered back porch in the rain with a bag of grocery's, then imagine doing the same at your boat. 

1454545862_IMOCA60cockpit.png.9f076fc9689f07eec8aa10d62c375b29.pngIf you want a porch, then forget your Hallberg Rassy or Swan or Hinckley or BendyToy.

You need an IMOCA 60.  They have all had porches for a decade or more.

Meanwhile, cruisers stay out in the rain and spray.  Mad.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct Watch standing seating position.

On a comfy settee. With pillows for lounging. You can see 270 degrees from this position. To see aft, you do have to sit up briefly and look out aft window or aft door.

Note the diesel heater exhaust pipe in the background. Watch keeper is kept warm and dry.

 

image.thumb.png.8fe85a135489743f29022b1aaf45b08d.png

Like sitting on starboard instead? Alternative chart plotter position, seated on rolling office chair.

image.png.4703f782f56cffa723d07d6f3a8f2040.png

 

Wood fired heaters on a boat are problematic as (a) the density of wood is less than a liquid fuel (b) the calorie output of wood is lower as well (c) you're not stacking wood in a perfect volume. So storing wood takes about 3-4x (?) the volume as liquid diesel. If we ran our diesel heater 24 hrs/day on a medium setting it would burn ~2 gal/day. (10L)

But ysignal may do well to consider the ubiquitous cow dung cake. He seems to have a low budget and these are available virtually for free in many places.

image.png.4f4c8ce21622eca8138bdafe142b7ad3.png

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Panoramix said:

Doesn't work like this!

That's heavy displacement (for its size) but won't take much weight before behaving like a submarine.

4ec1e042945d190b0f7d0c84a3aa6f6d.jpg

on the other hand a Pogo style boat is light displacement but will carry  lot of weight.

now - I can never unsee that. I honestly don't understand.

What I also don't understand: a pogo can carry a load? (an ultralight boat with canvas doors to save weight).

perhaps this has to do with the waterplane. hmmm.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Zonker said:

Correct Watch standing seating position.

On a comfy settee. With pillows for lounging. You can see 270 degrees from this position. To see aft, you do have to sit up briefly and look out aft window or aft door.

Note the diesel heater exhaust pipe in the background. Watch keeper is kept warm and dry.

 

image.thumb.png.8fe85a135489743f29022b1aaf45b08d.png

Like sitting on starboard instead? Alternative chart plotter position, seated on rolling office chair.

image.png.4703f782f56cffa723d07d6f3a8f2040.png

 

Wood fired heaters on a boat are problematic as (a) the density of wood is less than a liquid fuel (b) the calorie output of wood is lower as well (c) you're not stacking wood in a perfect volume. So storing wood takes about 3-4x (?) the volume as liquid diesel. If we ran our diesel heater 24 hrs/day on a medium setting it would burn ~2 gal/day. (10L)

But ysignal may do well to consider the ubiquitous cow dung cake. He seems to have a low budget and these are available virtually for free in many places.

image.png.4f4c8ce21622eca8138bdafe142b7ad3.png

 

who doesn't like cake?

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Zonker said:

But ysignal may do well to consider the ubiquitous cow dung cake. He seems to have a low budget and these are available virtually for free in many places.

Yes, sailing a 26-foot boat filled with a few months supply of cow dung sounds idyllic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TwoLegged said:

Are you saying that carboard and sellotape are ruled out?

 

1 hour ago, TwoLegged said:

If you want a porch, then forget your Hallberg Rassy or Swan or Hinckley or BendyToy.

You need an IMOCA 60.  They have all had porches for a decade or more.

Didn't one of the boats in the last go round make their porch cover out of some sort of cardboard (empregnated with epoxy, I think)?  As I recall, it didn't last.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TwoLegged said:

Yes, sailing a 26-foot boat filled with a few months supply of cow dung sounds idyllic.

Was it this thread or a different one where we were discussing hanging a yak from davits on the stern?*  You could have dairy and dung on tap, and it would only stink up the cabin on downwind runs.

*Typing that, I'm starting to think things are getting a little giddy around here.  Before you know it we'll be designing marine bidets...  :unsure:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Howler said:

Boat X has a design total weight of 5,000.  Boat Y has a design total weight of 10,000.  

Add 2,000  of gear and supplies. Boat X is 40% over its design weight. Boat Y is 20% over its design weight.

 

2 hours ago, Panoramix said:

Doesn't work like this!....................................a Pogo style boat is light displacement but will carry  lot of weight.

Well as I said before design displacement is the maximum displacement and dictates the ratios stability and hullform for the design speed. For cruising boats it's always a tentative displacement. Overloading is common on cruising boats and often necessary for expedition boats in the first part of a voyage. Unless you keep it coastal and have access to regular re-supplies from the shore.

 Planing hullforms are really weight sensitive wrt performance.  They have a very poor response to any weight above the design displacement. They are also really sensitive to trim.  Residuary resistance soars with additional weight for a planing hullform because of the wide abrupt transom termination, a very quick and very adverse change in wave making resistance.

You wouldn't want to load the Pogo above its cruising design displacement. Whats the manufacturers racing vs cruising weight for example for a 40 foot Pogo ?  I'd expect around 1/5 of a medium heavy hulls sensible capacity.

And where is the Centre Of Gravity of the Pogo and what stowage space is actually available ?  Exery kg of weight above the CG raises its vertical position and reduces stability.  Medium to  heavy displacement can often absorb a large amount of weight without moving the CG much at all.  Those hullforms also don't suffer the massive drag a planing hull experiences if overloaded.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites