Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Dalslandia

Canopus and Sculptor

Featured Posts

No gear no steer, farly normal i say, Dalslandia have a slight almost detectable reaction on rudder input when in neutral

 

The bar in front of rudder is to secure the thin skeg, if it was longer (fore - after) it would have been better i think.

 

how long slender is the swim compeered to the original?

Edited by Dalslandia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No gear no steer, farly normal i say, Dalslandia have a slight almost detectable reaction on rudder input when in neutral

 

The cheap "clone craft" holiday boat this summer has considerably better handling than Canopus, despite much shorter swims and no aft profiling.

 

I mean, just look at the anode position! The swims taper to feed undisturbed water into the propellor... so the very last thing you want to do is interrupt the flow's boundary layer just before the prop....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One would certainly expect the skeg to be self-supporting.

 

The rudder is clearly new, but is it a replica of what was there before ?

 

You could move the vertical post back to be beside the rudder pivot, tho the small gap between would be crying out to get blockages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm confused, is this your boat or just one you've found pictures of?

 

If it was my boat I was having built and I'd agreed with the builder what the stern design would be then I'd be having words!

 

But as others have said the original skeg and stern post was one solid casting so was a lot stronger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you be kind enough not to keep grabbing images from Sculptor's blog which I have been looking after. The image of Sculptor as a Fireboat was one I had scanned and attributed correctly to Ron Shettle and the one posted this morning says quite clearly that it was posted on Sculptor's blog courtesy of Brinklow Boat Services Ltd - have you requested their permission?

 

I am sorry I know it is not in the spirit of Peace and Goodwill to all men on this day of all days to ask this but they are the intellectual property right of someone else. A link to the Sculptor blog or perhaps a comment on that blog asking for permission may have been more appropriate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A nightmare of bits of ideas - a little knowledge IS dangerous. FMC steamers had a bearing aft the blades set in a vertical strut in some cases, also some had four blade props, all OK if used correctly. The blade shown in the picture is a three blade btw. Well done Leo 2 in commenting on where the pictures came from.

Edited by Laurence Hogg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm confused, is this your boat or just one you've found pictures of?

 

If it was my boat I was having built and I'd agreed with the builder what the stern design would be then I'd be having words!

 

But as others have said the original skeg and stern post was one solid casting so was a lot stronger.

If he is the current owner which I doubt the boat was not built for him as it is currently on its third owner. Not sure where the Sculptor replica bit come from as the first time it was mentioned was by the last broker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The opening post from this topic had been removed due to copyright issues with the photos used.

 

A summary of the opening post follows:

 

The hull of nb Canopus should be a replica of nb Sculptor, but deviates 'where it matters most' in having a bar between the skeg and uxter plate infront of of the rudder, which is said to reduced stearing and hence control.

 

The boat also now has a four bladed, which suggested to make out of gear handling worse. And the andoes on the swim are close to the prop.

 

 

 

Daniel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right ... I've split out the non contentious bits. Because we've lost the opening post, it doesn't make much sense, but until I can resolve the copyright issues, it is as it is.

 

The summary is that the OP used NB Sculptor as an exemplar to criticise the build of NB Canopus, in particular, the skeg design.

 

Take it away ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll put back the post I was trying to make when it got locked then.

 

Not sure how it will fit into the context now, but here goes....

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Well if it is the Canopus I assume it is, it seems to be attributed to 2 builders, one of whom posts fairly regularly on here, so perhaps he will pop up with a response. He owns a real "Grand Union", so probably knows a bit about how they are meant to handle!

 

Do you actually have practical experience of this boat and its handling, or are you just assuming?

 

I have to say I have seen Canopus out and about regularly, (and indeed passed it earlier this week), and I have never seen it in too much distress from the poor handling characteristics you claim it has.

 

I think you will find that whilst the vertical post between counter and skeg, just forward of the rudder, is not a feature of "Grand Union" boats, it is actually found quite regularly on FMC Josher motors. A shame FMC boats somehow struggled on with these then, but they seem to have manage OK for the last century or so!

 

One of the fastest Star class boats, still in regular trade, and often very well loaded, has had a 4 bladed propeller for years, and also does not seem to suffer in any way as a consequence.

How often do you actually get out on these boats to back up your theory with actual practical experience about how well they go and handle?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well said AF. R Fuller and the Brinklow team are no mugs. Too much theorising. It's not Ben Ainslee racing design territory or a super motor cruiser.

Edited by mark99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cobbett has exactly the same build on the rear and handled like a dream, forwards and backwards.

 

Same hull builder, I think, so probably not surprising that the constructional details are similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you claim credit for someone else's photos I can see the reason for objection. But if photos are in the public domain ie published on the internet, are either linked to or copied to another relevant place then does it really matter? Surely the only thing required is an acknowledgment of the source/owner of the photo? But no, a thread had been totally rubbished. I've no idea what it's supposed to be about. Seems a bit pointless and mean-spirited to me. What is the loss to the owner of the photos' IP?

 

Not that I am particularly interested of course!

Edited by nicknorman
  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely the only thing required is an acknowledgment of the source/owner of the photo?

 

This is the bit many people don't bother with, as was the case here, I believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The OP did state he took it from a blog - although he did not attribute it. I tend to agree with Nick unless a serial offender.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To explain further, a picture on the original post showed a thin (presumablynew) skeg, supported by the said bar.

 

It was suggested that the skeg be replaced by a thicker item, thus eliminating "the bar".

Edited by jake_crew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the bit many people don't bother with, as was the case here, I believe.

So why couldn't the action be to add the acknowledgement rather than delete the photos - and thus render the thread pointless?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you claim credit for someone else's photos I can see the reason for objection. But if photos are in the public domain ie published on the internet, are either linked to or copied to another relevant place then does it really matter? Surely the only thing required is an acknowledgment of the source/owner of the photo? But no, a thread had been totally rubbished. I've no idea what it's supposed to be about. Seems a bit pointless and mean-spirited to me. What is the loss to the owner of the photos' IP?

Not that I am particularly interested of course!

Nick - just to be clear - there were two images (one on this thread and one on a previous thread about Sculptor) that were taken from the Sculptor blog which I had express permission to use on Sculptor's blog - it says very clearly on the blog that they are copywrite of the two owners identified; Ron Shettle/Cath Turpin and Brinklow Boat Services. A link to the page would not have concerned me because they are being linked to in their original context but to say (and I quote) 'grabbed from Sculptor's blog' puts them in the public domain in the wrong context in my view. You ask what the loss to the owners is - it's their intellectual property right and the images belong to them. Have a look at post No7.

 

Here's a link to the place where the images are - http://nbsculptor.blogspot.co.uk/p/gallery.html

Edited by Leo No2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dpaws is the owner of Canopus.

 

He have been put in the "slammer" for 30 days for being a naughty boy, and can not respond to his own thread here. he is sorry for the trouble and for the fact he can not defence him self here.

 

Well he is not in the slammer, I am just trying to be funny on Christmas, we must be nice, and have fun.

 

he say:

"The photo of my boat was taken by the previous owner, who has given me the original on USB together with a book of photos."
Edited by Dalslandia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dpaws is the owner of Canopus.

 

He have been put in the slammer for 30 days for being a naughty boy, and can not respond to his own thread here. he is sorry for the trouble and for the fact he can not defence him self here.

 

I am sorry about that because (as you can see from Post No7) that wasn't my intention at all - just a bit of courtesy about using images that are on the Sculptor blog that I have, with permission, been allowed to use.

 

Perhaps more to this than meets the eye?

Edited by Leo No2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • 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.