Jump to content

17M or 18M (16 or 60ft)


Danny1234

Featured Posts

Richard et all

'That's all jolly good stuff. How many boats have you designed?'

None! ...... First time for everything isn't there!

Nothing ventured, nothing gained (better not tell you about my plans for an anti-gravity powered space buggy)

 

I can appreciated that there are a lot of dreamers (in all walks of life) who dabble with the idea of something but then when confronted with practicalities of implementing it, .... soon loose interest, .... or plough ahead .... into a big mess!

There have been a few comments though (in various other topics) that IMHO overplay the issues here. I'm not re-inventing the wheel. People seem to be getting a bit 'freaked out' by the prospect of someone 'designing a boat'. I appreciate that there are numerous issues, but it's a canal boat not concord or something!

I'm not starting from scratch so to speak. Just reviewing the different options and then I will see with the builders how much various tweaks here and there will cost and what benefits that may bring and if that is then cost effective.

I could just get one of the 'stock' designs (56 x 10 or something) which would probably be fine. Though I feel duty bound (to myself) to look at all the possibilities (and related time/complexity/cost issues) before I commission the final thing. I wouldn't want to spend all that time and effort (and money), ..... then when it's finished realise 'oh, if only I had got this or that done, or spend £1000 on this rather than that, ... though I would guess everyone does to some extent

 

'They will want to be able to trust you'

I want to be able to trust them!

I wouldn't dream of entering in to some contract for some considerable sum of money (not just the money, but somewhere to live!) without a full set of working drawings and spec. At the same time this should re-assure the builder. They have a full set of details, clearly stating what work is to be done. This covers them should the client start asking for extra bits and pieces.

Should it be required then I'll get a solicitor to confirm I have the funds and certain sums can be set aside if need be.

'The best way to work with people like this is actually to turn up with a sketch,, ....' I certainly do intend to be 'turning up'. Though I don't see that this should preclude sending some drawings/questions in advance to see how pro-active they are about taking on something slightly different.

 

'This isn't like any modern industry'. That's fine! I've worked on some pretty 'name' projects for 'big name' architectural firms, ...... behind the scenes I can assure you there's all sorts of pretty ropey ways of doing things that go on (ever wondered how it is that all these large public sector projects always end up running over time and budget, .... let's not get in to that right now!). Many of their working practices are not actually that 'modern' (a lot of it gets done by essentially, ..... working extra hours, .... done that one a few times!)

I'm not expecting this to be done by mail-order so to speak, or just via email.

Anyway, I thank you for your comments, ..... that's what I'm doing here, .... doing my homework so to speak. Part of that is picking up from people who have already done it/been there, what issues/problems/things to watch out for, there may be. I'm not in a massive rush and won't be singing on the dotted line until everything has been reviewed and clarified so to speak.

All being well, I'll be doing the rounds (of the builders) through June, then hopefully placing an order July/Aug. Obviously it may be some time after that before they have a free slot.

Meanwhile, I may ask a few more 'obvious' questions' and maybe even throw in the odd 'cranky' suggestion now and again!

 

 

We'll just have to see

Nothing ventured, .... nothing gained, an' all that.

Cheers

Danny

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Ohmygawd!!! You mean this:

ladytealatcrickboatshow2010.jpg

 

It might be spacious inside but that is one pig-ugly boat (with apologies to any pigs on the forum).

 

And I should think it steers like a brick!

 

In what way sense can that flat vertical bow be said to be "based on the Leeds & Liverpool Shortboat style". It should look more like this:

 

asc0_0.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<snip>

 

'freaked out' by the prospect of someone 'designing a boat'. I appreciate that there are numerous issues, but it's a canal boat not concord or something!

 

<snip>

 

Danny

 

Well, I've tried.

 

Best of luck with your project Danny, I'm looking forward to seeing what you have designed

 

Richard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could just get one of the 'stock' designs (56 x 10 or something) which would probably be fine. Though I feel duty bound (to myself) to look at all the possibilities (and related time/complexity/cost issues) before I commission the final thing. I wouldn't want to spend all that time and effort (and money), ..... then when it's finished realise 'oh, if only I had got this or that done, or spend £1000 on this rather than that, ... though I would guess everyone does to some extent

 

That's correct, everyone who's ever had a boat built or built it themselves has wished they'd done something different. However, that can also include incorporating all sorts of interesting features and novel designs into a build and then later wishing one had gone for something much simpler.

Edited by blackrose
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Richard et all

'Best of luck with your project Danny, I'm looking forward to seeing what you have designed'

Thanks, .... comments all appreciated. It is a major undertaking (particularly if you are going to live on it, and I think it's far preferable that people point out the issues/potential problems rather that just 'over enthusiastically' encourage newbies to 'just go for it' without letting them know what they are up against'

The photo, ..... yes, even to a novice like myself one can see that this would be a bit 'chunky'! (like the windows at the front though)

 

'that can also include incorporating all sorts of interesting features and novel designs into a build and then later wishing one had gone for something much simpler.'

Good point, .... I'm in the process of rationalising and simplifying things where I can (as I'm getting more familiar with the issues)

It is easy to get carried away with things only 'on paper' (or more precisely a computer screen) and start adding all sorts of neat little features, before fully understanding the build-ability and maintenance implications.

 

The completed design is a good couple of months away. I'll hopefully post up some blurb/images when things are under way.

Thanks again for you comments/feedback. Much appreciated

 

All the best

Danny

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Ohmygawd!!! You mean this:

ladytealatcrickboatshow2010.jpg

 

It might be spacious inside but that is one pig-ugly boat (with apologies to any pigs on the forum).

 

And I should think it steers like a brick!

 

In what way sense can that flat vertical bow be said to be "based on the Leeds & Liverpool Shortboat style". It should look more like this:

 

asc0_0.jpg

Yep thats one ugly boat and I know when it's coming to Skipton,I can feel it when it is at Bingley.Danny please put your boat design on here when ready, I would like to see it. :cheers:

Edited by bowten
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's odd that naval architects and marine surveyors take so much time and effort to become qualified when any architectural technician can come along and design a boat.

 

Where does the RCD stand on home made design?

 

 

 

In what way sense can that flat vertical bow be said to be "based on the Leeds & Liverpool Shortboat style".

 

'cos it's at the front, silly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Danny

 

I am of the same oppinion as the feeling on this thread. Whilst you may be a skilled designer and draftsman I fear you are simply trying to re-invent the wheel.

 

The basic format of NB's and widebeam NB seems to have reached the peak of design, IMO and probably others here, evolution is probably 99% complete. Indeed many have tried new approaches and ended up with boats that really are lees than they showed to be on paper.

 

You mentioned cutting down on your swims to get better use of space inside. This shows a very basic lack of knowledge of NB design. The longer the swim the better the boat will go through the water. I completly hid my swims behind the kitchen cupboards.

 

Have a chat with Nick Branston Maybe with his deep knowledge of boat design and your inovations something coul come together. This of course will cost, but might be cheaper than commiting to a build.

 

I built one of his WBNB which is pretty much in the size range you are thinking. See the sig for the blog. It has long swims and is chined and goes through the water beautifully, is very stable and when I get the steering right stays as straight as an arrow even when as on Friday we were hit with 35mph winds + gusts at 90 degress and she didnt even wobble.

 

I would suggest before you actually make a hull (assuming you get a builder to work with you) you could use your design and computer model it.

 

IMO the epic fail on NB design was NB WhitfieldThere's plenty of comments on this forum about it if you do a search. I'm sure there are other examples.

 

Having said all this, if you come up with the final 1% in one hit you will be hailed and its for this reason you should push on. The world needs inovators, however I think it won't be on this project.

 

Just my opinion, please feel free to ignore it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello all

Thank you again for you comments (both for and against!)

I've now had the chance to speak to/visit 3 or 4 builders which has been encouraging.

Must admit, ..... I'm still a bit taken aback by by various 'warnings'! ....... Though I do appreciate people raising various points when someone is considering spending a lot of time+money on some new venture (boat-house-holidays, ..)

Perhaps I didn't word things fully appropriately, ..... people seem to reading maybe too much in to my 'I'm designing a canal boat' type comments ....??????? Not sure how they have interpreted that. I'm certainly not claiming or intending to be able to improve or move forward the design of canal boats. Maybe I should have said 'I'm designing the layout and internal accommodation of a wide-beam canal boat. Having some related experience (and a team of 2-3 guys here in London that can do most of the relevant work), then to me that makes sense. Depending on how that develops, there are then different possibilities and options in relation to the shell+engine. I won't really consider any 'features' that aren't workable and generally speaking most of the shell/steelwork/propulsion will be 'fairly standard stuff' (hopefully then incorporating best practice and so on).

So I've got an option A, which would then be 35K for shell plus engine, Option B say 38K, Option C maybe 40K and so on.

Then these get reviewed and amended slightly as I discuss with various builders what can be done and what that costs/entails/pros and cons, ...

 

I did indeed contact Nick Branson, .... that all looked very interesting, .... though that was about 2 months ago and they didn't reply (I didn't take it personally), ....

 

'You mentioned cutting down on your swims to get better use of space inside. This shows a very basic lack of knowledge of NB design. The longer the swim the better the boat will go through the water. I completly hid my swims behind the kitchen cupboards'

I was aware of such, .... my initial design was around 45-48 ft, with swims around 9-10, which I gathered was about acceptable. Then that changed (due to the potential mooring having to go!), so maybe I could now consider around 56-57 ft. Having re-arranged the layout (2 double rooms rather than 1), .... this was still with the swims around 9-10 ft. So these needed updated/amending. That prompted my original question/posting. If going from 56 to may 60 doesn't really affect handling/access/manoeuvring (providing the shell is built appropriately), then I would add the extra metre (3-4 ft) which would pretty much all 'contribute' to the swims and then work on reducing the internal space (where most appropriate), so bringing them up to around 13-14 ft.

Not sure what is so 'epically bad' about the NB Whitfield.

Haven't fully read the whole story, ...... but if that's what does if for them, .... some people might really like/want something along those lines???????????

 

Anyway, ..... for now then I have indeed added the extra metre (so it's not 60ft or 18.250 metres) mainly in increase the swims, ..... doesn't sound controversial to me????

 

I have one or 2 other 'design tweaks' I'm hoping to make use of, ..... though that would be for another topic/posting

 

'I would suggest before you actually make a hull (assuming you get a builder to work with you) you could use your design and computer model it'

Indeed, that's what I have been doing, .... I reckon for a good 2 to 3 months more yet!

 

Regards

 

Danny

Edited by Danny1234
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Not sure what is so 'epically bad' about the NB Whitfield.

 

 

It was a very unconventional design, very, very expensive to build, and it was up for sale within a year of delivery having been hardly used. It was very hard to sell and only did so at a vastly reduced price. The original owners had lots of "good ideas" they brought from mediterranean cruisers, but they didn't translate to being practical for UK canals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a very unconventional design, very, very expensive to build, and it was up for sale within a year of delivery having been hardly used. It was very hard to sell and only did so at a vastly reduced price. The original owners had lots of "good ideas" they brought from mediterranean cruisers, but they didn't translate to being practical for UK canals

 

It was a good example of someone assuming they knew enough to design a boat suitable for a type of boating that they knew very little about. Due to the design, the boat even got damaged the first time they used it.

 

We see examples of this in London all the time, not necessarily boat building but buying boats that aren't really suitable for the inland waterways, here, perhaps too wide, weird shape and/or handle like a pig (but looked like something nice to live in ).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Danny

 

I agree Whitfield as a concept is fantastic, but IMO its where it should have stayed. It like expecting a throughbred race horse to pull a brewery cart all day.

 

Nick is somewhat difficult to contact and pin down but when you do its well worth it. Just keep on trying you'll get him in the end.

 

I think the general impression of you designing a NB / WB shell came from the talk of swims and shell builders etc.

 

Good luck with your project. Keep us posted on your progress, maybe start a blog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

 

This isn't like any modern industry

 

 

Well, not in this country... :lol:

 

I was concerned about the swims etc taking up floor space on our narrowboat. By careful / thoughtful design you can fit cupboards and beds etc over them and leave the floor space unaffected.

Edited by Chalky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Have a chat with Nick Branston Maybe with his deep knowledge of boat design and your inovations something could come together. This of course will cost, but might be cheaper than commiting to a build.

 

 

 

Nick is a good bloke, but normally very busy, you have to persist to get hold of him.

MA is what he designed for me. For a one off design, you really need to get at least three boats built, to spread the design cost. Me and Graham at Riversdale are still trying to find the third person :rolleyes:

 

Img_6366.jpg

Img_6368.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do all Branson designs have a full length keel Neil?

 

It looks like a very nice barge and (if it were built or upgraded to Cat C) I bet it would handle relatively well at sea, but for rivers I think I'd prefer a baseplate at the bottom rather than a keel. Being able to take to ground is useful on tidal rivers, but on your boat I'd worry about toppling over!

Edited by blackrose
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hello there

 

I'm getting a wide-beam canal boat designed and built, .... for now it's going to be 56' x 12'6", or 17 x 3.8 metres (gulp!)

 

Would just like to check a couple of things as I'm now negotiating with shell builders.

I would be limited to the Southern wide-beam network (I've already accepted/decided that).

The figures I have here are

Lee & Stort: 84' x 16' and 85' x 13'3"

Regent's Canal: 72' x 14'6"

Brentford and Paddington to Camp Hill: 72' x 14'

Kennet & Avon: 70' x 13'6" (at the narrowest section)

Basingstoke Canal: 72' x 13'

River Thames: 100'plus x 14'8"

Wey & Godalming: 72' x 13'10"

 

Not too sure how it works with the Grand Union. Though normally the Southern End is OK for wide-beams 13', .... though there seems to be some problem/issue around Berkhamstead??????

 

Quick question then, is 12'6" OK for the Southern wide beam network? Would seem that it is.

 

How much difference if there for manoeuvring/steering between 17 meters and 18 (56' versus 59 or 60)?

I would guess not that much actually as it is only about 7% or so difference.

Plus, it may actually give mine slightly better handling, as I have 'squeezed down' the swims to maximise internal space (though they should still be usable). That's at 17 meters. If I added the extra metre, then I could increase/improve the swims a bit.

To clarify, is 18 metres (60') going to make any real difference in locks, compared to a 17 metres (56')?

 

Any 'real-world' feedback appreciated!

 

Cheers

Danny

The choke point is the Kennet & Avon to get from east to west.

After a year of research and many emails and phone calls to the UK we were able to freeze on 70' x 13'6' x 7'8" AD for the K&A.

Cheers, Rewi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nick is a good bloke, but normally very busy, you have to persist to get hold of him.

MA is what he designed for me. For a one off design, you really need to get at least three boats built, to spread the design cost. Me and Graham at Riversdale are still trying to find the third person :rolleyes:

 

Img_6366.jpg

Img_6368.jpg

So thats how you get over the problem of shallow canals, you put wheels on the bottom. :captain::cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.