Re: [Paddlewise] QCC boats and water line length ........

Matt Broze
http://www.marinerkayaks.com


>Matt wrote;
>
>
>>Open Canadian canoes are a relatively specific type of craft without a lot
>>of flare and rake as opposed to an umiak or dorie (and I want to exlude
the
>>Hiada Canoes from this Canadian canoe group too as they also have a large
>>amounts of rake and a high bow. I find them extremely seaworthy craft.
>
>(SNIP)
>
>
>I guess one needs more experience with Canadian canoes to appreciate the
>range of shapes etc.

I figure they are the same shape as Viking ships, so handle the same. What
more do I need to know? ;-)
You are making my point. Experience with a wide range of the type craft
being designed is far more important to a designer than great expertise in a
related design field. The absolute worst article on kayak design I ever read
was written by a sailboat designer. "Basics of Bow Design, Kayak Drag and
Skin Friction” by Tom Goddard in a mid 1996 issue was so hilarious and off
base that I though maybe it was a hoax article foisted on the unsuspecting
editors of Paddler Magazine.

I wrote:

>>Just what drawbacks of  kayaks are you alluding to? Please be specific.


John responded:
>Difficult to load for one (relative to canoes). Not suitable for
>transporting family from one camp to another.  Don't portage well. Just a
>few.


An Eddyline Grand San Juan kayak should handle a family of four just fine,
camp to camp. How big a family can fit in a solo canoe? I'd like to compare
singles with solos (or at least doubles with tandems, seems more fair. By
just a few do you mean that is all or only just a few of many? If the later,
please continue as I haven't even heard about the on the water drawbacks of
kayaks yet. about all I've been able to come up with is easier the step in
and out of when wading the riffles on a shallow stream.
>
<SNIP>
John wrote:
>My brother wrote an article about about the effect of weight in the ends of
>a boat for Sea Kayaker that you might find useful. Don't recall the issue
>but maybe Chris Cunningham does.

Yes if I recall correctly it was "Slug Feet Squared" or something similar.
(Yup, Fall 1991 issue 30. V8,#2 p35 according to the Sea Kayaker index for
those who would like to read it. I really like the looks of the kayak in the
drawings too;-) It seemed (and still seems) to me to be a minor point in
kayak design but it did point out the much bigger benefits of loading the
heavier items close to the middle and lighter ones in the ends when kayak
camping.
But based on the information in the article shouldn't the paddlers in an
open canoe sit close together in the middle rather than out near the ends.
That would decrease its gyradius (or Equivalent Arm--EA) by many orders of
magnitude not just the small increase more bow rake in the ends would cause
(if waterline length is the chosen constant). I bow to you as my best source
of expertise in open canoe design John. Please explain to me why open canoe
paddlers sit so far away from each other--do they learn to hate each other
so much that they choose to suffer the serious effects of their extremely
increased moment of inertia to stay out of range of a canoe paddle swung in
malice? (I can see all sorts of reasons why closed tandem slalom canoeists
shoved their cockpits right together roughly twenty years ago. Passing
through narrow slalom gates sideways, not having to wait until the second
paddler 10+ feet away cleared the gate to turn, the new art of gate
sneaking, yaw gyradius, pitch gyradius. Just a few.-)



***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List
Submissions:     paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net
Subscriptions:   paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************