CS 17 with a Lid? Hmmmmmmm....

[Tim Diebert]

I have always admired Grahams designs. I love the simplicity and speed. But, I am in need of something a bit different than what he offers.

Let me explain. I do happen to have a happily  modified Weekender right now. It is pretty nearly perfect for what I am doing... right now. Sailing the big lakes in the interior of BC. This boat kind of found me and got me back into sailing. For that I am thankful, and if I could have only this boat to live out my days, I would also be thankful. Because being on the water is absolutely the very best way to spend time.....the type of boat you have is secondary. But, having said all that, and being a person always shooting for improvement ....I would like eventually to build or to 'build up' the boat I do want to grow old with. As folks on the other forum may have noticed, I am a fan of a particular man and his boat, Charles Stock and 'Shoal Waters'. A boat very similar in function to Charles boat is what I would like to one day have.
I had thought to find an older/ larger dingy and modify it as he has done...and may do that if the right hull comes along....but lately I have been having thoughts of a CS 17 modified to have a small cockpit, and small house etc. I would want it rigged a gaff cutter, as I have now and as CS Stock has....for I have found that I love this rig for the versatility, the compact spars and the ease of set up/take down. Yes, I also think the cat ketch is pretty damn groovy, but not what I am after. The CS 17 hull, though, is very cool and might make an interesting platform for such a boat. I wonder if it could be so?
See 'Shoal Waters' here on an old Wooden Boat thread.
http://media5.hypernet.co...mp;f=6&t=001697&p

Yes, the Belhaven is an awesome design, a very close to what I would love to have, but it is too big for me. Cost-wise and sailing-wise. It is more boat than I need. I generally sail alone or with one person.

Thanks all. Hopefully Graham will comment.

[Brent]

It is easy to imagine putting a coach roof on the forward section of the CS17, and fitting out with a bunk and other accomodations to support a one person cruiser.  With some care for insuring structural integrity and keeping the windage minimal I would think a fine boat could be had.  It would closely resemble...a Belhaven.

You will no quarter here for modifying a sweet sailing cat ketch into a gaff cutter.  Perhaps all of us went through some consternation over the unfamiliar cat ketch arrangement, but I for one have found it to be a wonderful way to put more joy into my sailing.  As someone who enjoys a good turn of speed and frequently sail solo, I am very pleased with what the cat ketch offers.

[Tim Diebert]

Thanks for your comments Brent. I have enjoyed your posts about sailing your CS.

Not being a naval architect, my main concern over these ideas I have is in the adding of quite a bit of weight with additional structure. Is there enough buoyancy in the hull as is...or would increasing the height of the topsides be necessary?

Right, I am with you on the rig. From what I have read it is quite sweet and fast. I have thought about this quite a bit. On of the key reasons for moving away from my current boat to another is to increase the speed factor. To make more miles on a given sailing day. But, as a day sailer configuration the cat ketch is great as you are free to move around just by standing up and going. Once this project had a small cockpit, side decks and house, moving around would not be so easy.
absolute tests done on the same boat between a gaff rig and marconi found that the marconi created far more heel and required extra ballast.....all things considered....over the gaffer. A much lower center of effort it is said...and the same turn of speed for the most part.
It would be a good discussion for sure. The one thing I do know is that whatever rig, it will have to be decided on before doing the drawings and starting construction. The main concern would be making sure the centerboard location matched the sailplan  (CLR / CE)

At one time I considered going to a day sailer-open boat design and using a boom tent....and I may still do that......if I DO go in that direction you can bet I would stick to the sail plan as laid out. I just see a level of security with the closed plan. If my current boat is any indication, I have sailed many times in conditions where semi solid water and spray is frequently coming over the boat. In an open boat I could see everything in it getting pretty damn wet. (now that I think of it, I have never sailed an open boat) I live where it can be pretty cold even during the height of sailing season...that small amount of dry protected area is nice on days like that. But....being the procrastinator I am, I also see the huge appeal of a quick/light open go faster. Life if good when you have choices.

[Tom Lathrop]

Out of the corner of my eye, I can see Graham cringing behind his drafting table.  To be honest, your questions make a designer cringe.  Add the weight of a suitable mast and gaff plus a deckhouse to the CS17 and what have you done to the stability, among other things   Something different for sure.

The thought that a gaff rig will be easier to rig and handle or faster than the cat ketch is wrong.  Just ask anyone here who has tried both.

Of course you can do what you want to any boat but it is wise to assume the designer knew what he was doing.  Not always true, of course but feedback from the people on this forum should lend support for this particular designer.  

I really don't mean to beat you up because no one should ever be afraid to ask questions.  I did mean to get your attention so that you could look at your proposals more critically.  

The Belhaven does sound like a good choice for your intended purpose.  If you don't want that big a boat, adding a collapsable doger to the CS17, as designed, would work.  If you require a fixed cuddy, you might consider one with fixed side sections and a walk through center like some of Michalak's boats or the Skiff America.  These have a sliding canvas center section to allow access to the bow.  I'd consider even this much modification pretty drastic.

In the end, the choice of a boat by an individual is often (mostly) guided by emotions that even they don't understand or are even aware of.   What is thought perfect for you now may be completely out of favor next year.  May be best to just pick one that you like and go sailing without seeking to make it "perfect", whatever that is.

Peace and good luck

[BradW]

I think Ray has the right of it.  If Graham isn't talking yet, it's cause he's trying to formulate a nice way of saying, "No way, Jose!"  That boat "Shoal Waters" has got to be MUCH heavier than the CS.  They say in the articles it is ballasted, and the hull itself will be much more burdensome.  To carry all that interior, rigging, etc. it would have to be.  Try adding all that mass to a CS, and it'll just keep sinking lower in the water and losing stability.  Different missions, different designs.  Look at the CS17 specs.  With a hull weight of 300-400 lbs and a design displacement w/ payload of 1000 lbs, that means at most 700 lbs. of people and stuff, and that's with the lightest possible hull. To add cabin, interior (even a little), supplies, gear and the weight of a heavier rig, you will cut dangerously into that designed displacement, not to mention adding more weight up high in a gaff rig and running the risk of getting the C.E. out of position with the different sails.

 Now, I suppose one could go with high tech carbon fiber mast, gaff, boom, and probably bowsprit, vacuum bagged epoxy/foam hull, and composite laminates for the cabin and furniture to keep the overall weight the same, but that seems an awful waste of effort.  Start with a design from scratch which is designed to look and work the way you want.

[Tim Diebert]

Out of the corner of my eye, I can see Graham cringing behind his drafting table. To be honest, your questions make a designer cringe. Add the weight of a suitable mast and gaff plus a deckhouse to the CS17 and what have you done to the stability, among other things  Something different for sure.

>Ah, but if we all left boats stock where would many of the great boats and great designs be? I love to alter things, stir up the pot and question known fact.

The thought that a gaff rig will be easier to rig and handle or faster than the cat ketch is wrong. Just ask anyone here who has tried both.

>Wrong only as you say. I am comfortable with this rig, as I have said. At no point did I say it was going to be faster or easier to handle. I am a fan of the gaff/ cutter style rig and plan for the rig I have gone to great lengths to lighten and modernize will swap over from the boat I currently sail to whatever similar boat I end up making. The 17 fits into this catagory.

Of course you can do what you want to any boat but it is wise to assume the designer knew what he was doing. Not always true, of course but feedback from the people on this forum should lend support for this particular designer.

>I find your reply slightly offensive Tom. When did I indicate that Graham did not know what he was doing? I have been reading this forum for basically as long as it has been here, and I support this man in all his designs. (I admired his designs before the forum existed) Are you suggesting I am being critical of his work? Seems to me I have only praised his work and any other folks who's work I have commented on this forum and others.

I really don't mean to beat you up because no one should ever be afraid to ask questions. I did mean to get your attention so that you could look at your proposals more critically.
In the end, the choice of a boat by an individual is often (mostly) guided by emotions that even they don't understand or are even aware of. What is thought perfect for you now may be completely out of favor next year. May be best to just pick one that you like and go sailing without seeking to make it "perfect", whatever that is.


>It is a very worthwhile excersice for me to practise restraint in this 'conversation'. Something I don't have much of. I am going to try and say this without bending any of Franks Golden Rule.
If we were having this conversation face to face I would accuse you of being rude and insulting and I would politely ask you who the hell you thought you were? So where did you come up with all these assumptions...such as I have no clue what I am doing?....my ideas are guided by emotions I don't understand?  WTF?

[Scott Dufour]

Tim,

It seems to me that you only want us to agree with you.  I found Tom's reply diplomatic and carefully thought out.  Your ideas are being weighed all over the world by the readers of this forum, who are some of the kindest and most helpful people I can imagine - Tom included.  The truth is that he, and others, have taken the time to respond to your inquiry.  I for one also think your modifications are not a good idea.  That's what you asked for, it's what we've given.

You're welcome to build any boat you want, of course.  

This is a nice forum but it's easier to get offended through text than it is in person.  Without a face and tone of voice to soften words, any criticism comes through as knife-edged and authoritative.  I don't want to speak for anyone else, but this isn't, usually, a belligerant group.  Please accept the discourse for what it is.

With kind thoughts and respect,

Scott

    Tim I feel much the same as Scott here. In reading your pointed reply, you should at least rethink your approach and reorganize your thoughts to address the pointed issues Tom has addressed here.

[Tom Lathrop]

Tim,

This discourse represents what is worst about correspondence in cyberspace.  

The only assumption I made was in thinking that you wanted some critical analysis of your ideas.  That is what I intended to offer based on experience in the building of and sailing of the CS17 plus many years of close association with the designer and some minor contrubutions to the design of the CS17.  This assumption was obviously in error and so I humbly ask your indulgence for my remarks which clearly scratched your tender psyche

I can only take credit or responsibility for what I say and not for others interpretation.  Time spent in drafting the first reply and now this one would have been better spent in my shop, where I now go.

[Tim Diebert]

First of all. My apologies to all. I have re-read this thread from the top and I found that I have over reacted.
As Tom says, " my tender psyche"  may have gotten in the way here. Sorry for that.

I understand what you are trying to tell me. Basically, don't mess with what we already know works well. I get that message, and I guess this really isn't the place to discuss the misuse of a given design...being a forum dedicated to the designer who's design I am suggesting messing with.

If I had any brains, I would follow your advice and move on from here. But, we have already established that I haven't any brains. So I will end this thread by saying this.

The boat that Charles Stock built up was a bare hull when he started. The original use of this hull was as a light weight Marconi rigged dinghy/daysailer. He managed to achieve his goal using that hull. In my interest in achieving similar goals I have searched for similar hull to start with, length, beam and overall shape. The CS 17 is the closest I have found so far.

Sorry to stir up the pot here folks.

Cheers, TD

[Garry]

No need to apologize. Stirring the pot is acceptable as long as its not done in a mean-spirited way. Your questions were completely valid. And even those who were a little more defensive recognized that you may do as you like. Just remember that each persons answer is valid only from their point of view. You have your own point of view, so go with that.

I've posed similar questions in the past myself. You'd be surprised at the responses from a question about the advantage of using two anchors routinely could raise on the Cruising World Bulletin Board. But, like my tag line says, I'm always learning.

Good luck, Garry

[Brent]

Tim,

May I suggest a look at the Bolger Light Schooner.  This is a two masted gaff rigged schooner that from all I have heard is quite fast.  This boat may be an example of what you were refering to in terms of the gaff rig keeping the center of effort low, resulting in a high speed to sail area ratio.  

From what I have read this boat is a hand full to crew, so it probably doesn't fit into that easy cruise boat genre.  However, given your preference for the gaff rig this  might be place to start designing from.  If it were my project I would be looking for something other than a flat bottom boat, something with at least a few degress of dead rise.  In my mind this gives a more stable and forgiving hull, and I like the asthetics.  This is where the B&B boats might come into play, but keep in ming that the CS boats are optimized for the cat ketch rig.  I might consider some of the double ended round bilge dory type hulls, or maybe talk to Oyster about those coastal cruiser type planked hulls.  I am thinking I have seen  gaff rigged cutters or something close in pictures at the NC maritime museum.  Might be fun to tap into history for this project

By my way of thinking, if I went with a fairly large water line length (17 is probably around the lower limit) and at least a 6-7 foot beam, then adding a cabin roof big enough for a couple of bunks could be done without compromising boat performance.  I would use my eye as a guide, in the end I would want a boat that had lines appealing to my eye.

I would be happy participate if you choose to continue using this forum to process your boat search/design concepts.

[Designer]

At last!!! We are back on line after 8 days out.
We don't need boats, we want boats, so who says our boats have to be the most practical or functional. If a gaff cutter speaks to you then why not have one.
When designing the CS17 I knew that I would get this question because the cat ketch rig is not that well known or understood. I roughed out several rigs on the boat to make sure that I wouldn't have to make major changes for them to work. The amazing thing is that I haven't gotten this question more often.
The cutter rig has more sail area than the cat ketch but the CE is 6" lower.
The jib could be on a furler and rolled up as the breeze increases leaving full main and staysail. As the weather helm increases, the centerboard can be rotated aft till it becomes necessary to reef the main.
The rig is quite versatile and reasonably practical, however she won't heave-to like the cat ketch and gaff mains are notorious for twisting off downwind in a blow, so I would tack down wind when it blows.
As for the cabin, I don't have time figure that out. That is what I designed the Belhaven for. I do think that tastefully done, a low profile and light cabin will work. The boat has a large footprint on the water for its size and is therefore a very good load carrier so there is a room for some ballast.

Brent, in my limited experience with sailboats, the only name that I can relate to your comments would be in the order of a trunk cabin. The trunk, in most cases are only for a limited amount of out of the weather comfort, to protect gear and fragile folks, if that makes any sense to you. You are very limited with the amount of space, and height, depending on the type of sail rig. When you get past this simple matter, I will leave it to the real experts for experiementation.

[Designer]

The mast is stayed. I intended to step it on top of the centerboard trunk so that the trunk can carry the thrust down into the hull. I planned to have a gate at deck level so that one person could put the mast heel into the step, then walk the mast up to the gate, close the gate and then he could set up the stays at his leisure.
That is far as I went with that rig. It was enough to prove that it would work. If there is enough interest I can finish it off.