Designer

Here is an 18' Sanpan that I designed a few years ago. The owner wanted electric power, so we made a well with a plug thru which we glassed in a shop made glass tube and cut down a 75# thrust motor to fit the plug. It turned out very well in practice, has plenty of torque and takes up very little space. I had intended to have a second plug for use under sail to eliminate the prop drag but the owner is happy with it the way it is. [attachment over 4 years old deleted by admin]

Joe, I have been kicking around a larger touring version of our 2 person Moccasin canoe for a while now and I think I can maintain the same building qualities as her smaller sisters and give you the load that you want. As for your second request, I have a bit too much work on my plate right now to start such a project.

The 3'9" measurement for the Mini Paw beam listed on our web site allows for fendering outside of the gunwales. The beam to the out side of the planking is 3' 6", and the gunwales will add 3/4" per side. The typical width between oarlocks is 40 1/2". 5' 10" oars work pretty well for the Mini as you can stow them on board. I would set up the oars so that there is 1 1/2" between the grips so that a beginner can't hurt themselves with jammed thumbs. There is no need to cross the oars in this short length, and if you have a lot of inexperienced rowers using the boat they will have less problem learning with this setup.

Hi Brian, I guess as no one else has jumped in here, I will. I have certainly sailed the Princess myself, although not nearly as extensively as Chick, her owner - and computerphobe! So, I will have to add his e-voice to my own experience. I'm pleased that she sails well in a zephyr and yet does not overwhelm or frighten in a fresh breeze. She handles nicely and motors well. I guess you might consider me a prejudiced party, as the designer, so let me just relate my own philosphy here, which hopefully will help you. I never design a boat unless I believe I can make a substantial improvement on any existing design of the general type. So you will not see my designs apeing a "traditonal" design theory. I think boats like cars - or computers for that matter - have evolved and continue to improve. I am very concerned that a boat should function fully for whatever the design parameters are. To this end, I am not wont to add frou-frou to a design just for the sake of ornamentation or to resemble some other boat designed 100 years ago. Further, I hate to sail a boat that is not quick and agile...so my boats tend to perform well....which is part of the function in my mind. Just because a boat is meant for "cruising" or a "family boat" does not require that it be a stodgy, slow dog. In my philosophy, there is no mutual exclusivity between the function and the performance here. Obviously when I design a real race boat, speed then becomes it's main "function" and "comfort" other than that which enhances crew performance, is not a major consideration. Boats which I would not say were appropriate to the average family sailor....just as I discourage most people from having the rig Brent Sparks has on his Core Sound boat - because he is an extremely experienced racing sailor - and wanted the nnnth degree of speed for higher level competitve purposes (check that string if you haven't read it). Lastly (but still one of the three major design factors) I approach the styling. But because I put the function and performance ahead of style, I never sacrifice those to a style point. A case in point...you may notice my boats don't have the sharp rise in the buttocks that a lot of people associate with traditional boats. I've had clients ask for more, because it's "pretty"; but again since it decreases speed and performance - I'm insistant that it not be given a priority. I also tend to design boat with the greatest efficiency a bit toward the higher end of the speed range (per the design type), and am willing to sacrifice something at the lower speed range. This gives not just better performance at the upper end but also better handling. Hopefully, the results are function, performance AND aesthetics. Once I have mapped out the above parameters, I work hard to make the boat as "buildable" as possible. Since I am also a shipwright, I think I have a slight advantage over some designers who never worry about the "hands on " development of the design. I refuse to "design down" to a perceived building ability - I'd rather find a way to build it that is accessible even to the amateur with minimal experience. Then, when they have expended the expense of materials, and moreover, their precious labor - they have beautiful, valuable boat to show for it - a real investment, not a box. A vessel they will not "grow out of". I like you was inspired by the stories of the sea...and the romance - so I hope I have not put you off by my philosophy....I guess my business is packaging the romance into a modern craft - with beauty and the best of the function we have available today.

I would choose a nesting version only as a last resort. While all of the points made in the above statements were valid, they did not point out what you give up. The longitudinal bulkheads/ side seats make a stiffer boat. The seating is better for sailing, with different crew/passenger combinations. Most of the time you are sitting on the seat, rather than having to sit on the gunwale as you have to do in the nested version. In the event of a capsize the one piece boat floats with the heeled (capsize) waterline that does not come inboard of the seats, allowing you to right the boat with a much smaller amount of water on board. The fore & aft bulkheads stop the free surface effect of the water rolling from side to side making the boat more stable during recovery. An automatic bailer keeps the boat dry when sailing in rough conditions (you would need 2 in a nesting version). While there is a real need for nesting versions with space issues related to carrying the boat on deck for a tender...but you have to give up a lot for it. If you are considering matters of "storage space" or "portability" in a household situation, the cons are greater than the pros....the boat is, in reality, no easier to store or carry, as the weight, and beam are the same. You have to carry or load the halves into a car together anyway. If you don't have to contend with the situation of space on deck, vs. carrying capacity for a crew, I'd advise that you build a standard model.

Karl, Thank you for pointing out that error on our web site. I don't know where the 5'10" came from. We must have been perpetuating a typo. The actual beam to the outside of the planking is 5' 6 5/8" and the gunwale will add another 1 1/2" +- depending on gunwale stock and whether you put on a rub rail. Beam is usually quoted to outside of the planking, but on small boats some people like to use the total width of the boat if space is tight which is why you often see different beams quoted for the same boat. I was trying to think back to the first iteration of the CS17 and I think I did take out a small amount of flare from the sides amidships.

Joe, I too am curious as to how she performs with the oversized rig. I can see by Brent's photos that he will be overpowered quickly. While sailing "Ketchup" in the last "Great Race" with 3 people on the rail in 20 knots and gusting I still had to feather into the wind often. The lake where he sails is renowned for light air and Brent is an experienced Highlander sailor, a class known for it's huge sail plan. You will see that he has a set of reef points on each sail and I expect he will use them often. With the standard rig she has plenty of power and unless an owner is a highly experienced sailor and is willing to work hard a lot of the time I would strongly recommend the standard sail plan. Maybe Robb will chime in as he just completed a cruise in his CS20 with a standard rig.

Yes you still need to turn the grain across the boat. It's surprising how little, glass on the compression side stiffens a panel. It is not that much extra work to put a butt block every 4', and the 4' panels should be quicker to fit.

Hey Scott, I will definately be posting the information when we put the plans on the web site for sale. Also, of course, the launching photos and sailing shots. By the way, for those contemplating where to stow the engine (3hp), you will be interested in the attached pics. Here's what we did on this boat and this could be adapted to several other designs as well. The owner wants the boat to be primarily a sail boat and just have an engine if he gets caught out in no wind and a deadline to get home. He definately did not want the engine permanently mounted on the transom which could foul the sheets. We raised the aft seat to get enough height, like Robb Blackburn did on his CS20; with a lift out front panel. We made a strong mounting point with a 2x4 and a plywood web, the engine is amazingly secure and safe. There is even enough room to the side for the fuel tank. The engine is inserted from the front and is clamped to the bracket. [attachment over 4 years old deleted by admin]

Congratulations on starting. If I was building with fir plywood I would run the grain of the seats accross the boat instead of fore & aft as shown in the plans and accept a butt join every 4 feet. The reason is that 1/4" fir is 3 ply instead of 5 ply as in okume. The result is that 3 ply is not as stiff accross the grain and the seats will flex excessively when walked on. On the foredeck you should keep the grain fore & aft as you will have a tough time bending it accross the deck camber, especially forward. To make up for the cross grain stiffness I would add an extra deck stringer on each side. As has been stated, this will be a livelong memory for you and your son - and the boat will be around to remind you both on a daily basis. My, now middle aged, daughter, still fondly remembers some of our projects together - like rebuilding the engine in her first car. I still look back at the pictures of us staring at the engine dangling over the car - and what a warm memory it is.

Hi Scott - We are so glad that you came out of the shadows, where you were lurking, and into the sunlight of posting! And let me apologise for making your life and decisions more difficult :wink:. Yes, the boat is going to be offered on our web site. The plans are pretty much finished now - enough to build from - but we want to sail the prototype before releasing the plans to the general public...just in case I want to take a nip or a tuck. The prototype is well along, they are putting on decks and looking at getting sails/hardware etc.... Based on the building progress, I would expect I will be listing the plans early in the new year. It is good to have you posting - stay in the light.

Scott, That seems like a sound approach to me. Cutting the slot without holding the bottom will change it's shape slightly, because the cut relieves the tension that you bent into the bottom, although the doubler will stabilise it a lot. You did not mention a long spacer placed inside the trunk (above the jig saw depth) to keep the trunk straight and true.

It seems like you need a tighter fit between the bulkheads. This may seem like a lot of trouble but this is what I would do. Stand up the stern half of the boat so that the bulkhead is horizontal. Sand the bottom 4" or 5" of the bulkhead so that it will take epoxy. Cover the bottom 3" with a layer of thickened epoxy. Place a piece of plate glass or formica that has been waxed (so that it will release) over the thickened epoxy and press it down to make a flat smooth surface. Clean up the squeezed out epoxy making a nice square corner between the bottom and the bulkhead. Remove the glass/formica when dry and clean up the new epoxy surface, you should have a nice flat true surface. Use almost the same procedure for the forward half of the boat: Sand bottom 4" 5"of forward bulkhead, wax the aft bulkhead, lay on a layer of thickened epoxy on forward bulkhead and bolt the the two halves of the boat together, clean up the squeezed out epoxy and make a nice square corner between the forward bottom and bulkhead. You should now have a perfect moulded fit between the bulkheads. The idea is not to make the join between the bulkheads watertight, but to stop water pressure from squirting all the way up the bulkheads and into the boat. Another alternative would be to wax one bulkhead and apply a thick bead of silicone to the other bulkhead, say 3/4" in from edge. Bolt both halves of the boat together, BUT NOT TIGHT. After silicone cures you will be able to tighten the bolts and compress the silicone.

Terry, I presume that your "gushing" is water coming up the daggerboard trunk and between the nesting bulkheads when going fast. I would be the last one to tell you to go slower. The trunk is a common problem that is easily fixed by making a dummy daggerboard (to be used when not sailing) that is nearly as deep as the trunk. The bottom end is covered with a just over sized piece of rubber held in place with a piece of 1/4" ply. I have never had any experience with water coming up between the bulkheads and no one has complained to me about it before, so you will have to explain to me exactly what it does so we can work it out.

The CS 17 spars are both 19' 9". The plans give the specs. for birdsmouth spars. There is no reason that wood spars can't be stiff enough or strong enough, but they will be a little heavier than aluminum. While in Papua New Guinea I built some fine spars from a wood called klinkii pine, and I noticed that the Phillipines had many of the same wood species. I am sure that with some research you can come up with some nice spars. On your second question, yes there are plans for the sails included n the design pack. Having spent some time in the far reaches - we have a good deal of empathy for the needs of builders off the beaten track...but remember, help is only and e-mail away.

She is 15'2" LOA being the longest that we could get out of 2- 8' sheets. Beam is 5'5" and sail area is 106 sq. ft.

Well, a new baby is being born in the B&B family. The Core Sound 15 is a little sister to the 17 and 20. Hull number 1, well along now, is being built for Dickie Newsome, the owner of Core Sound 20 hull #1. He loves his 20, but wanted a smaller boat to sail single handed - and keep the 20 for family sailing. (One can't have too many Core Sound boats can one?). His wife thought that at his age ( we won't mention exactly what - but suffice to say he's seen some history ), stepping the 20 masts single handed was a bit silly. The boat is being beautifully built by Bill Heil - and those of you who can make it to St. Micheals for the MASCAF will see the quality of his work first hand. The picture is of the hull - but she has her interior pretty much in place now - I'm behind on my photo duties :oops: [attachment over 4 years old deleted by admin]

Charlie gave you good answers on the subject of the offset masts and cabin squaring up (I did alittle doodling on this cabin and it can be made to fit the boat alright). I would never suggest "chopping off" the Princess. It would seriously and detrimentally affect the balance - and other things! It is better if we work with you on slightly re-styling the Belhaven cabin to your liking.

In spite of 'Isabel', I will be at the Mid-Atlantic Small Boat Gathering at The Chesapeake Maritime Museum in St. Michaels, MD this weekend. I will be bringing Bill Heil's Core Sound 17 and Frank Voorheis' Grand Diva kayak. Additionally, John and Carolyn Burritt will be there, with their beautifully built, B&B designed boat, "Miss Stephie". Hopefully, other B&B family builders will be there to exhibit their boats as well. I look forward to seeing some of our family of B&B builders, owners and prospective B&Bers there and having a chance to chat with you.

Steve, I don't often see Sailing magazine. I know Tom Wylie has done some cat ketches and he is a very competent designer so I'm sure his 65 will be a good boat. I am not sure if it is the size of the boat that has piqued your interest but there is nothing wrong with the scale of the boat that sound engineering can't solve. Rob, I am getting excited for you and looking forward to hearing of your launching next week.

A quick note to say that we have fared pretty well. The water came up about 1' higher than Dennis. I ended up 3" of water in my shop. Every thing of value was raised off the floor. The water has started to recede now that the eye has passed and the wind has rotated around. There is some wind damage around town and amazingly we still have electricity. As I write this the wind gusts are coming back.

Ms. Isabel is determined to visit us - right here - in Vandemere. We assured her we would send her all the information about our boats she wanted - but nooooo she insisted an seeing it for herself! :cry: We are busy battening down today - boarding up and waiting. We will watch. We know the electric and phone will go down. Luckily, these days with the outside contractor linesmen, tree removal and phone linesmen being put in place before the storm, recovery is much quicker - but it will take some time. We will keep you advised as things progress. Hopefully, we will weather this with just a mess and no real damage. Thanks to all of you for your good wishes and invites to wonderful places - hopefully we will get there to visit in good weather for a sail together!

Richard, The way we reef on a sleeve luff is to sew on a reinforcing patch, similar to the tack patch, and then sew on a webbing loop back about 18" (450mm) from the luff on the line of the sprit. The snotter is unclipped from the mast and clipped on to the webbing loop. The mast is rotated, rolling up the sail till the snotter clip is beside the mast. Pin the mast to stop the sail from unraveling, sheet in and sail on. [attachment over 4 years old deleted by admin]

Here is a picture of Ketchup's homebuilt simple rugged mastlock. [attachment over 4 years old deleted by admin]

I was hoping that others would respond to this. It appears that your friend is long on bad theory and short on experience with cat ketches. There is no tendency to bear away in a gust, unless you decide to dump the mizzen sheet in a gust and then you would. The mizzen does operate in the backwash of the main, the same as the main operates in the backwash of the jib on a sloop, it is up to the skill and judgement of the designer to balance the hull, rig and appendages to make it all work over the widest range of conditions. The sprit or 1/2 or full wishbone is what makes this rig really work. By eliminating sail twist, the rig becomes docile especially downwind in strong winds. Upwind the sheet loads are lower because you only pull the sails in rather than in and down. We have discussed reefing on earlier posts, but if I was building a CS20 I would fit either a sail track and reef the conventional way or use a sleeve luff with a rotating mast that locks. We fitted this to Sam & Earls CS20 Ketchup and Sam called me last week to tell me that it worked fine when he used it last time out.