First Mate Sailing on the Wind

Here is a twenty second clip showing First Mate sailing to windward on an enjoyably fresh day. This should give some indication of a number of things - the benefit of a sharp entry when it comes to spray suppression, the effectiveness of a well cut balance lugsail (in this case 76 sq.ft.), and how pleasant it is to sit low in the boat with one's weight concentrated in the weather bilge.

Note that the skipper is sitting forward against the main thwart, so that his weight is in-line longitudinally with the centre-of-buoyancy, ensuring that the boat trims correctly.

Video courtesy of Ian Hamilton - First Mate skipper David Lillistone

Dinghy Cruising with a Mothership

I am approaching sixty-five years of age and for most of my life I have spent my nautical leisure hours sailing a dinghy of one sort or another. Dinghy sailing has added greatly to my understanding of a range of subjects, and other than the experience of being a spouse and a parent, sailing has been my central passion.

A recent three-day trip allowed me to add to my dinghy cruising experience in a manner which may be of interest to others who are reaching an age where comfort and shelter send out a Siren call to dinghy sailors who have reached an age of decrepitude. One of my sons accompanied me and my equally decrepit friend Ian, and he suggested that we pair of oldies would benefit from something more comfortable to sleep aboard that a pair of light-weight sailing dinghies. Dave's suggestion was that we should take along my Phil Bolger-designed 16 ft diesel lobsterboat to act as a mothership.

Phil Bolger Lobsterboat powered by a Yanmar 1GM10 diesel of 8 hp (continuous rating)

The Lobsterboat as drawn by Phil Bolger with an open interior, strip-planked smooth hull, and powered by a long-shaft 15hp outboard. With the designer's consent, I built mine with a glued-lapstrake hull, a cuddy, and an inboard diesel.

Ian wasn't impressed with the idea of taking along a motorboat, but I could see the advantages given where we were intending to go, so I told him it was going to happen whether he liked it or not.

The initial plan was for the camping gear, food, and water to be carried in the Lobsterboat and that we would all take turns sailing the dinghies. The combination looked good because the Lobsterboat cruises very happily at five or six knots despite her semi-displacement hull, and she has a big propeller well suited to towing if required.

The dinghies were  a Flint and a First Mate - both being 15 footers (or very close to) - Flint is a rowboat which sails well, and First Mate is a sailboat which rows nicely!

Flint showing a 59 sq.ft. sprit-boomed Leg-o'-Mutton sail as used on many of Phil Bolger's small sailing craft

First Mate with a 76 sq.ft. Balance Lugsail

Flint is currently rigged with a 59 sq.ft. Phil Bolger generic sprit-boomed Leg-o'-Mutton sail left over from a previous boat, while I wait for the 'as designed' gaff-headed sloop rig to arrive. The combination of a tall rig set on a heavy composite mast and a sail without the capacity to be reefed meant that the idea of sailing Flint down the bay for four hours into a blustery south-easter was not practical. So, we set off with Flint under tow, and David sailing First Mate. Strike one for the Lobsterboat...

We were sailing into the lee of Green Island here and the water was relatively flat - but outside the lee things were pretty boisterous!

The conditions outside the harbour were 'character building', with a strong wind right in or teeth. Dave sailed hard on the wind, but the combination of a strong headwind and an outgoing tide meant that we were making slow progress. Nobody wanted the sailing to stop, but in order to get to our destination before dark, it was decided to cut short the sailing at a point just under one quarter of the way to our anchorage. This situation demonstrated just how beneficial the mothership concept was turning out to have become. We were all time-limited, and therefore did not have the luxury of anchoring-up somewhere until the conditions improved. But with the Lobsterboat and her muscular Yanmar diesel, we were able to continue - straight into the teeth of the playful south-east wind while towing both sailing dinghies. Strike two for the Lobsterboat...

As always seems to be the case, the camera makes the sea look more calm than it actually is - as you can see from Flint leaping over a wave, it was rougher than it appears.

It was late in the afternoon when we reached out destination, but as soon as we were safely anchored, Dave rigged Flint and went off sailing around the anchorage and beyond. Our harbour was excellent as a anchorage, but it was so well protected that we only got light and flukey wind, and the sailing was less than exciting.

About a mile from our intended anchorage

Mothership safely anchored , allowing  for an evening sail in Flint

What became immediately clear to all three of us was just how pleasant it was to have a roomy, stable boat upon which to set up our accommodations. In our part of Australia the UV levels are cruel to humans much of the time. In our dinghies we rely on sun-screen and protective clothing, but in the Lobsterboat we had the tremendous benefit of a bimini and a cuddy cabin. We all sufferred from the sun over the three days on the water, but it would have been much, much worse without shelter. Yet another strike for the Lobsterboat...

The Lobsterboat and Flint. In the late afternoons we attached shade-cloth around the western-facing end of the bimini.

We spent a pleasant few days exploring - mostly in the sailing dinghies, but when we weren't sailing it was very convenient indeed to have access to the shore by way of  rowing.

Flint acting as a tender

I'm expecting to get hold of some more photos and video, but in the meantime, here is a short Youtube clip of the outing...

Fleet under Oar Power - a short video clip

Since publishing the previous article about Fleet and Fleet, and their respective performance under outboard power, I've been asked by several people to report on performance under oar power.

Flint was designed from the outset to be a dedicated rowing boat - the power and sailing options were after-thoughts. She rows beautifully in my biased opinion.

Fleet on the other hand has a hull-form which is not optimised for rowing, but because of her light-weight and lean hull, she does got surprisingly well - certainly much better than the typical aluminium outboard skiff (they are about as bad to row as you could imagine - even compared with an inflatable!

Here is Fleet in the only worthwhile clip I possess:-

Next is a nice clip from a Flint builder in Italy (I think) - such a pleasant little clip:-

These two clips should be viewed in the context of the previous post if you haven't read it already

Flint and Fleet - Different Hulls for Different Jobs

My introduction to “reading” the shape of a boat’s hull by viewing a lines drawing came from watching over Dad’s shoulder as he read copies of “The Rudder”, Motor Boating’s “Ideal Series”, Howard Chapelle’s “American Small Sailing Craft” and other such documents. I guess I was about five years old at the time, and it wasn’t too long before I had a practical introduction to a table-of-offsets when Dad started to loft the lines of William Atkin’s Nancy, a 15ft 6in LOA modified sailing dory of 5ft breadth, and 13ft 6in length on the waterline. My part was to read out the offsets as Dad marked everything on his full-size lofting. I didn’t understand what the numbers meant, but I knew they were somehow very important.

Full-size lofting taking place in my workshop around 2003. Basically, expanding a set of lines from the scaled paper drafting to full-sized pencil and ballpoint drawing on white-painted plywood.

Full-size lofting taking place in my workshop around 2003. Basically, expanding a set of lines from the scaled paper drafting to full-sized pencil and ballpoint drawing on white-painted plywood.

As years went by my free days were spent sailing a Charles MacGregor-designed Sabot at the local sailing club and generally living a salt-water life, enjoying the freedom afforded to kids in the early sixties. But in the evenings I found myself drawn more and more frequently to the stash of books about boats which lived in a particular part of the wall of bookshelves in our TV-deprived house.

The drawings which attracted my attention most were the outboard profiles and the sail-plans. To me it appeared that the lines drawings were only for higher beings than myself, and they meant little to me.

Moving on fifty or sixty years, I now know that a boat drawing without a set of lines is like music without notation. Yes, music can be played by ear, and a boat can be built by eye or half-model – but for most of us, a set of lines is the key to visualising and understanding the shape and behaviour of a particular boat.

A typical lines drawing, showing waterlines, buttock lines, and hull sections. I also draw diagonals, but they are not shown in this particular drawing

But just as I know people who are amazed that I can’t ‘hear’ a piece of music by looking at the notes on paper, I find myself puzzled when someone who has a set of plans for one of my small sailing or rowing designs asks me if she will take their 15hp outboard!

Back in about 2003 I was asked to draw a design for a fifteen-foot rowing boat which was to be used by a very experienced waterman when he needed to row to the mainland from his island home on Moreton Bay, Queensland, Australia. Moreton Bay is a wonderful and varied paradise for boat people, but one of its notable characteristics is the ability to generate a particularly short and steep wave pattern. This new rowing boat design needed to be shaped to handle such conditions.

The resulting design, called Flint, has turned out to be very popular with home-builders. In fact, I use a Flint as my recreational boat-of-choice at the moment. She is 14ft 10in x 4ft 3ins and weighs in at as little as 40kg (88lbs). The boat is arranged to carry a small outboard for those who for whatever reason need that facility, and shortly after the plans were released, I started to receive letters and emails about using motors larger than the 2 to 2.5 horsepower units I recommended in the plans and instructions. Much time was taken up in writing emails to potential builders, explaining why excess power was counter-productive

In order to be an efficient rowing boat, and to be able to sail effectively with the optional sailing rig, the lines drawing for Flint shows considerable keel rocker, and the buttock lines (i.e. the bottom of the boat in profile) sweep upward at a significant angle to the waterline, terminating above the water at the stern transom.

In order to satisfy the many people who still insisted on using larger outboards, I drew another design - based on Flint - which has almost zero keel rocker aft of amidships – she is called Fleet, and will run happily at speeds of up to 20 knots (23 mph) in good conditions. More importantly, Fleet will run quietly and smoothly at her sweet-spot of about 12 knots (14 mph). At such a speed she is covering ground to windward at nearly four times that of a similar sized sailing boat. A potent and efficient magic carpet for an explorer who has limited available time.

Flint is 14ft 10in x a fraction over 4ft at the outside of the hull planking – Fleet is 15 ft x 4ft  - and both are made from the same pile of plywood and can carry similar loads. But from there the similarity ends. Flint is sweet as a rowing boat, close-winded and fast under sail, and cruises nicely with a two horse-power motor throttled back to the point where noise is not intrusive – under such outboard power she sits in proper trim at about 5.5 knots (6.3 mph).

Late last year my boating friend, Ian Hamilton, and I had a wonderful opportunity to carry out a series of tests, comparing the speed and behaviour of a Flint and a Fleet while using a range of motor sizes on both boats. The conditions were perfect, and because there were two of us, we were able to photograph and video the action, as well as recording the GPS-derived results in a note book. What a tough job – but I guess that someone has to spend a couple of days on the water playing with boats in the interests of science…

Although we tried a range of engines, I’m only going to discuss in detail the results from the two engines which I consider to be a good match – in efficiency and utility – for each of the designs. These engines were a 2hp Honda four-stroke; a 4hp Suzuki four-stroke; and an old 4hp Yamaha two-stroke. Fleet has a planing hull appropriate for higher speed operation, and Flint has a displacement hull as is appropriate for her row/sailing hull-form.

The reason that I was particularly interested in discovering the performance characteristics of Fleet with a 4hp motor, was because that is the size of motor I had in mind at the time of drawing the boat – but it was one size I had no performance reports about. One of the reasons for my curiosity is that 4hp/2.9kW is the maximum size motor one can use in my State without having to register the boat.

Engine	Flint – one adult	Flint – two adults	Fleet – one adult	Fleet – two adults
2 hp Honda BF2	6.8 kts/7.8 mph	6.2 kts/7.1 mph	7.9 kts/9.1 mph	7.1 kts/8.2 mph
4 hp Yamaha 2-st	9.7 kts/11.2 mph	8.3 kts/9.4 mph	11.2 kts/12.9 mph	9.9 kts/11.4 mph
9.8 hp Tohatsu 2-st	-	-	21.3 kts/24.5 mph	18.5 kts/21.3 mph

The speed data shown in the table is exciting to me, because it demonstrates just how efficient a lean, light-weight outboard utility can be, and how the law of diminishing returns works in reverse when the size and weight of power plant is reduced.

A spin-off which came from our testing is that we had two boats of the same length, breadth, and weight, being powered by identical engines, with the only significant difference being the bottom shapes from amidships aft to the stern. This allowed a photographic comparison of the longitudinal trim of the displacement and planing hulls under power.

Fleet above and Flint below

The drawing above shows the profile view of both hulls. Length, breadth and depth are just about the same, but the bottom shape from the midsection aft indicates major variations in performance.

Fleet at 8.5 knots (9.8 mph)

Above - Fleet running under the urge of a 4hp Suzuki four-stroke, making 8.5 knots (9.8 mph) at part-throttle – the engine being new and still in the early stages of the running-in process. Trim is good, but in a small boat like this, crew placement is critical.

Fleet at 8.5 knots (9.8 mph)

Above - another shot of Fleet running at 8.5 knots (9.8 mph). In both photos the boat is running cleanly, and is probably consuming around 2.5hp. Not much energy being wasted making spray. 

Fleet running at 9.8 knots (11.3 mph)

In the photo above, I'm at the tiller of an old 4hp Yamaha which is pushing Fleet at a GPS-measured 9.8 knots (11.3 mph). The boat is carrying two men weighing a total of 171 kg (376 lbs) plus anchor, chain and a few gallons of drinking water. You can see just how clean and flat the wake is, and I find it amazing that the boat is doing this on 4 horse-power.

Now things changed! We put the exact same motor on Flint to see what would happen with a displacement hull. Most people would not think a  4hp engine to be excessive power, but read on...

Flint being pushed by an old 4hp Yamaha

Here we see Flint being also being driven by a 4hp motor – in this case an old Yamaha. Note the completely different fore-and-aft trim, caused not by crew placement, but by hydrodynamics. A substantial amount of the engine’s power is being converted into spray and wave-making. This is borne out when you look at my speed and power tabulation - Fleet is fully 1.5 knots (1.7 mph) faster than Flint with the exact same engine and the same skipper – a 15.5% difference.

Another shot of Flint displaying what happens when a hull optimised for displacement speeds is provided with more power than she requires. If you look carefully at the angle the aft gunwale makes with the water and then refer to my profile drawings, it is easy to deduce that even though the bow is cocked high in the air, the aft bottom of the boat is nearly parallel with the water’s surface.

Although Flint looked most inelegant when pushed by a 4hp motor with an open throttle, she should not be written-off as a power-boat.

Flint at 5.5 knots (6.3 mph) powered by a Honda 2 hp BF-2 at reduced throttle

Here she is looking efficient and capable, running at 5.5 knots (6.3 mph) pushed by an eighteen-year-old Honda 2hp air-cooled four-stroke. The engine is throttled well back to a comfortable level of sound and vibration, and the boat is running sweetly. I am not a powerboat person by inclination, but there is great pleasure to be gained by running along quietly like this, and you can cover a surprising distance in a short time – all on a cupful of fuel.

Flint at 6.8 knots (7.8 mph) - 2 hp Honda at full-throttle

But even with the 2 hp motor, the boat starts to look out-of-place when all two of those horses are let loose, getting the boat up to 6.8 knots (7.8 mph). One-and-a-half miles per hour faster than before, but the pleasure has gone out of the experience – noisy and lacking the slicing motion.

Flint looking purposeful and dignified under sail.....

....and nestled into her surroundings under the gentle power of oars.

So what are the lessons illustrated by this interesting little series of experiments?

·         Two boats of similar proportions, weight and displacement, but with differing bottom shape in profile, will operate in vastly different ways when pushed beyond displacement speeds;

·         It is folly to use a motor which is larger than recommended by the designer, if your boat has a displacement hull (unless she is a tug);

·         A long, lean planning hull can be extraordinarily efficient when driven by a motor which is unusually small by current power-boat standards. Even a confirmed sailboat person such as myself can derive lots of satisfaction from the effortless speed, economy, and low noise-level of such a boat. A gentle way of covering distance in a short time, without conspicuous consumption;

·         Theory is wonderful, but gaining proof through gently controlled experimentation is a powerful way to demonstrate results.

The two boats – similar size and weight, but very different performance.