Here's a link to an excellent article that gives a hint regarding the work that goes into designing a kayak: http://www.pygmyboats.com/WoodenBoat%20Article.htm Doug Lloyd Victoria BC ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~ "Whatever can be said at all can be said clearly and whatever cannot be said clearly should not be said at all." Ludwig Wittgenstein ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~ *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Doug wrote: - Here's a link to an excellent article that gives a hint regarding the work that goes into designing a kayak: http://www.pygmyboats.com/WoodenBoat%20Article.htm G'Day Doug, I can't pretend to know anything about kayak design. I'm trying to understand the process. The link you put forward and the information on the Mariner website suggest that the principal function of those computer aided design tools, with the exception of Matt's drag spread sheet, is to facilitate the generation of templates and cross sections for building boats. Clearly a non trivial task requiring many years investment of time and skill, but not at the core of the knowledge needed to design a boat. It is extraordinarily generous of Matt Broze and Robert Livingstone to make such programs available. Having said that, even with such programs I confess I could no more design a kayak than paddle to New Zealand. If I designed a half decent boat it would be sheer good luck. That part of the design process, which considers the effect of the hull shape on: turning ability, tracking, kayaker size and weight, immunity to pearling, weathercocking, ability to move into or out of a broach on a breaking wave and many other parameters, all seem to rely on the designer's experience of paddling, testing, building and selling many boats, rather than physics or mathematical modelling. This shines out of Matt's description of the history of the Mariner boats and seems to be an aspect of kayak design that truly blends art and science. If what I've said is right then I wonder to what extent the kind of experience necessary to design a kayak can ever be reduced to rules of thumb or equations. Perhaps with some designers instinct may serve better than analysis. I also wonder about the kind of thoughts and experience you will apply in designing your boat and hope you will keep us up to date. By the way I'm a friend of the Nadgee designer Dave Winkworth. I also have a great respect for Matt Broze, and his generous approach to sharing knowledge. So I don't want to enter into the boat copying debate, though I would dearly love to hear Dave and Matt get together and talk it through one on one, maybe over a bottle of good wine but that might be hoping too much! All the best, PeterO *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Peter replied (snip): >...Clearly a non trivial task requiring many years investment of time and skill, but not at the core of the knowledge needed to design a boat.< Yeah, I realize that, but the article did imply the kind of mental hard work that goes into some of these buisnesses, design being the core unless one simply copies existing hulls. Kit boats and plans don't become popular. usually, without good design. I do wonder how some of these kit boat hull designs recieved their initial inception. Did they go through the same evolutionary process as Matt lays out on his website? I do know amongst the buisneses providing kits/plans/completed wooden kayak, there can be tension and legal wranglings from time to time too, so not all is always rosy with that segment of the kayaking world, though I applaud guys like Nick, his brother, et al for helping the masses have an affordable option to commercial glass boats (well, with a little elbow grease). But like Shawn pointed out in general, it is up to any offended parties to track down and attempt to resolve the issues that are causing friction. I think some level of discussion on groups like Paddlewise can be appropriate, but not all would agree. I've certainly gained a wider appreciation of some of the issues I did not have before, prior to Peter T bringng up certain inquiries. I just wish at times the objectivism from all parties would extend the full 100%. >That part of the design process, which considers the effect of the hull shape on...turning ability, tracking, kayaker size and weight, seem to rely on the designer's experience of paddling, testing, building and selling many boats, rather than physics or mathematical modelling.< True enough it wouls appear, though some would niggle with your statement and add that physics and math are all part of it too. Funnily enough, we did have a destroyer-class navy vessel a few years ago in Canada, all computer designed, fail its first sea trials (costing the tax payer a bundle if memory serves me correctly). The permutations are endless as Mr. Winters implied with boat design. The wise paddler looks to buy newer designed kayaks that are tested/designed by real paddlers and tweaked before being put into production. I think the Tempest 180 is a good example, though I don't know the history/origins, if any, of the initial hull design inception. I do think that the combined efforts of various recreational paddling discussion groups, dedicated traditional kayak discussion groups, club-written information sharing, and the myriad of books, paddling magazines, web sites, etc, all make the task of understanding the sport of sea kayaking in the context of boat characteristics and the pursuit of better boats much easier, though I do find opinion varies widley, enough that a given expert often directly condradicts what other experts are saying. >This shines out of Matt's description of the history of the Mariner boats and seems to be an aspect of kayak design that truly blends art and science.< Balancing the need for good tracking for open-passage making with the ability to easily turn a kayak when needed is an aspect that frustrates a lot of paddlers looking for the perfect kayak (for themselves), as well as the designer I imagine. Matt and his brother have done an outstanding job here, comingling the two flip sides of the coin. The other kayak that does a wondeful job in my opinion, and like the Mariner line of kayaks has generaly good glide characteristics despite its width, is the Gulfstream. I just don't like how I sit in/experience these aforementioned kayaks, but it is a totally personal preference obvioulsly. Matt claims his kayaks don't need skegs, but some of the models do require sliding seats to optimize efficiency while underway, so I still think the perfect boat hasn't been developed yet (one with no moving parts other than the paddler). I do find it interesting that most of the kit boat websites claim their kayak designs obviate the need for rudders and skegs. Though subjective, I do think this is an exaggeration. And gear capacity is a whole other realm when one does view a good sea kayak with an eye to expedition paddling. >If what I've said is right then I wonder to what extent the kind of experience necessary to design a kayak can ever be reduced to rules of thumb or equations. Perhaps with some designers instinct may serve better than analysis. I also wonder about the kind of thoughts and experience you will apply in designing your boat and hope you will keep us up to date.< I often wonder how the folks at Current Designs, Seaward, Necky, etc., come up with their designs. Do they hire navel architects, pay consultant fees, experiment and play - having hired (or are) intelligent, creative individuals. Personally, I'm headed toward a steep learning curve myself with respect to executing design (lofting, offsets, etc.). And I've been too busy splashing my kayak all over the coast for the last two decades to pay much attention to hull design equations, etc. I do know what I like and don't like, and where I can improve on what I have. I hope that will serve me well. I certainly have the ability to manipulate wood to benefit from some of its inherent properties and work the situation where those properties resist the builders will. I don't want to too severly challenge the design to the point where it would be easier to go back to fiberglass which contorts to any shape. Here is a top-ten list of prime considerations: 1. The hull must be strong. This may rule out hard chines. I feel semi-round produces the strongest configuration, but can't back that up scientifically off the top of my head. That profile at least must catch less guff sideswiping over reefs. 2. The boat needs to be fast. The ability to move away quickly from danger or work away from a lee shore is a must in areas prone to sudden squalls. Again, a round bilge hull normally yields less wetted surface and a quicker boat - all things being equal (and they never are). 3. The boat needs to be long. Again, the need for speed is paramount. Some of the faster, really long race-type kayaks are a hoot, but not in any kind of real sea. 17 to 19 feet would be my max. parameters, navel architecture aside (and ignoring some of the shorter kayaks that have a good turn of speed). 4. The boat needs to be narrow, 19 to 21 inches maximum. I don't paddle to take pictures or fish. Ocean kayaking takes place in waves. One must be able to readily lean into the action and remain perpendicular with good paddle form. Narrow usually means fast too. 5. The kayak must be low-profile. The sea is a windy place. I'm appalled with some of the sea kayk designs intended for open ocean. My preference runs toward a wetter ride in order not to scarifice the lower profile. 6. The kayak has to track well without a rudder or skeg in a variety of wind and wave conditions. This will be challenge to design. My Nordkapp tracks much better (in a device-free mode) with edging and leaning. This can be very difficult to maintain in heavy seas due to lack of solid initial stability with this particular kayak (the emphasis here being holding course). I may still add one of said devices as back-up. 7. The bow must carry the front of the kayak over the waves and not bury itself, especially in following seas. This can be more difficult to achive than it first appears, while maintaining reduced windage (IMHO). I was very dissapointed with the Necky Arluk II which I believe was an attempt to fix some of the Nordkapps difficulties in this regard. I watched one in increasingly more difficult head seas for 7 hours once on a long, ill-fated crossing. It plunged worse that the Nordkapp, then resisted coming back up. 8. A choice must be made between Swede and Fishform. If I go Fishform, I'm going to need a bit more fullness in the stern to aid tracking and increase seaworthiness. 9. The kayak must be an extension of the body. Ideally, one should hardly be aware that the boat is even beneath you. Very few kayaks other than traditional craft offer that (but they suffer a small payload capacity (again, IMHO). 10. The craft must be astetically pleasing. Pleasing to my eyes, anyway. And pleasing to my soul. I throw my whole spirit into paddling when I'm out on the sea, even for a short trip. I can't imagine renting a different kayk (one I'm not happy with) for a wilderness sojurn, and still experience the journey the same way. This is probably a failing on my part. I've always been a firlure to myself. But I do have fun, and hope my next kayak will provide that. > By the way I'm a friend of the Nadgee designer Dave Winkworth. I also have a great respect for Matt Broze, and his generous approach to sharing knowledge. So I don't want to enter into the boat copying debate, though I would dearly love to hear Dave and Matt get together and talk it through one on one, maybe over a bottle of good wine but that might be hoping too much!< Anyone who does not have respect for Matt, even if you dissagree with him, is a complete impbisile. He can push the conspiricy theory a bit at times, but it is only because his mind is working at 90% more capacily than the rest of us (well, some of us). Wine? How about some wine, a moon filled night, with kayaks sitting above the high-tide, glistening with hope for a new day of uderstanding for the 'morrow. Some design insiration. Anyone knoe the story on this? http://www.qajaqusa.org/gallery/New_Zealand/Tutakaka_flyer Shawn in a Night Herron (a kit boat with rat promise. Anywone lnow its capacity? http://www.qajaqusa.org/gallery/New_Zealand/shawn_spine_rolling Doug Lloyd (who's wife peered over his shoulder tonight and said don't forget design point number 11: "Finish the house resnovations and all the furniture have done, before you can build a kayak. Then I got the silent treatment, which of course, I don'tt mind!) Vicoria BC *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Just found this site. It has a good list of considerations for a sea kayak: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/grantglazer/Kayak/DesignCeleste.htmf Doug Lloyd Victoria BC *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
If this doesn't work:http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/grantglazer/Kayak/DesignCeleste.htm, try: http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/grantglazer/Kayak/photojournals.htm Click on "Designs," then go to bottom of page for the Celeste and click on designer's name. Doug Lloyd Victoria BC *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Doug wrote: - >Click on "Designs," then go to bottom of page >for the Celeste and click on designer's name. G'Day Doug' and Paddlewise, Thanks for those links. The Celeste looks like a beautiful boat, or maybe I'm a sucker for a good write up:~) It had me seriously thinking about renting a workshop for a year! Here's a webpage, which I'm pretty sure you will have seen, but it may be of interest to others. http://www.nswseakayaker.asn.au/mag/29/design.htm It gives an articles on design parameters by Norm Sanders with a linked critique by John Winters. John refers to an article in Kanawa in which he shows how "a good boat was almost inevitable so long as the builder does not try to force natural materials to do unnatural things" Unfortunately I couldn't find the article in the Kanawa archives but have emailed them for a copy. All the best, PeterO *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Peter replied (snip): >Here's a webpage, which I'm pretty sure you will have seen, but it may be of interest to others. It gives an articles on design parameters by Norm Sanders with a linked critique by John Winters.< http://www.nswseakayaker.asn.au/mag/29/design.htm Yeah, read that one once before, but forgot about it. Here's a link where Ray Jardine reflects what you stated in an earlier post regarding kayak design being more intuitive. I'll quote the pertinent sentences, as navigating to the site might prove bothersome: "...I morphed two time-tested designs. One was a Dyson baidarka and the other was a Herreschoff canoe. Then I drew upon my own paddling experience, which included a few thousand miles in the Sea of Cortez, and a 3,300 mile trip along the coasts of British Columbia and southwestern Alaska. Because you see, boat design science and technology are one thing, and intuitive reasoning based on tons of experience is another. And when a designer comes along with the capacity for both, we have a recipe for some magic. " From: http://www.rayjardine.com/projects/kayak-construction/kayak_design-comments. He's an interesting fellow, to say the least. Doug Lloyd Victoria BC *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Doug Lloyd wrote: > Here's a link to an excellent article that gives a hint regarding the work > that goes into designing a kayak: > > http://www.pygmyboats.com/WoodenBoat%20Article.htm It was interesting reading about software and kayaks: I spend a bit of my free time and some work time developing "free software", which is "free as in freedom". I'm many of you out there have heard of Linux, or maybe the web browser Mozilla or HTTP server Apache. All of these software packages are free to copy, with some restrictions. They are copy-lefted, not public-domain, meaning that the original creator reserves certain rights and control over their own copyrighted work. http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html * The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0). * The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this. * The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2). * The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3). Access to the source code is a precondition for this. I spend a bit of my time helping out these projects because: 1. I use free software and feel obliged to contribute because if I don't, who will? 2. I enjoy the pride of seeing my contributions out there, the name recognition is nice as well. 3. It's fun. 4. Helps my resume, it looks good to employers. Software design isn't exactly boat design, in that boats are probably best designed by one hand. Does this analogy make any sense? And--currently--designs can't be protected like software can. But consider if boat designs were protected and there was a similar "free" boat design movement, as say Linux: If you had somebody who came out with 3 solid hull designs, publish under "copy-left" (which were copyrighted), consider the possibilities. Although many expect anarchy when it comes to free software, changes are usually tightly controlled and a free software package often turns into a mature product. Eric Raymond calls the free software development model the Bazaar: http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar If kayak designs were like free software, expert paddles and even average paddlers might contribute changes or suggestions. (People can make suggestions now, but let's say the designer ignored your pleas: Your own changes could be incorporated in a related design.) What if there was a "bug" database for kayaks, where design defects or suggestions could be tracked? With appropriate design collaboration software (e-mail?) maybe somebody would develop the Linux of kayaks. (Penguin shaped!?) Anyway, free designs could be downloaded and customized for different people: Maybe some of these designs would be appropriate for home builders (plywood or strip construction), others would be published for commercial development (fiberglass or plastic). Any of your changes would have to be released. If you change a loft line or two, you would be obligated to publish the new dimensions and acknowledge that whoever still "owned" the original design, though he may or may not have approved it. (Typically, under free software you have the freedom to keep the changes to your self if you don't redistribute them.) How would designers make money? Well, the same way that Linus makes money: Business and software consulting. Customization. Branding. What impulse would there be to design something new? Fun. Industry analysts speculate that Linux is going to take over the operating system market--well, maybe not for home systems, but at least for servers--in the not-so-near future. Eventually, maybe in the next fifty years, without design protection in law or not, enough people are going to "donate" enough kayak designs. We'll eventually have intelligent enough software and fabrication machinery to instantly pump out these designs and any variations. There likely isn't going to be any need for the Microsoft of the kayak world. [P.S. Personally, I would like to see protection for boat designers, but at the same time I don't want designers to be "anti-social" (for want of a better word.)] *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
On 14 Aug 2004 at 1:01, Elias Ross wrote: > is "free as in freedom". I'm many of you out there have heard of > Linux, or maybe the web browser Mozilla or HTTP server Apache. All of > these software packages are free to copy, with some restrictions. > They are copy-lefted, not public-domain, meaning that the original > creator reserves certain rights and control over their own copyrighted > work. Interesting comments. The Economist recently had an article on the open source software model and proposed that the same approach could be used in other businesses. As you say, you make your money on providing value to the customer, not battling for ownership in the courts. This could work well for things like S&G, strip and SOF designs, where the information, not the physical product itself, is important. However, it is harder to use with a manufactured product. If kayaks were modular, where one could pick a hull from, say, Mariner, a deck from VCP, fittings from Seaward etc, then that would be different, but "free" (in the user-contribution sense) manufactured products are tougher to see working (star trek replicator based manufacturing excepted). One good thing would be to see features freely licenced. You can patent all you want, but if you retain exclusive manufacturing and sales rights, your market may be poor. If someone invents the best ever widget for kayaks but limits them to their own wonky boats, then the world will not beat a path to their door. However, if any manufacturer can include the widget either by licensing the manufacture of their own version for inclusion or buying the widget modules of the first, the first guy can make money even if no one ever buys one if his kayaks. BTW, a local store/manufacturer that gained considerable notoriety for "borrowing" designs and features from established kayak companies recently closed up shop. I know that they once claimed that they sold boats for Boreal, but these were in fact very cheap copies. The market place seems to have worked in this case. Mike *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Mike wrote: - >If kayaks were modular, where one could >pick a hull from, say, Mariner, a deck >from VCP, fittings from Seaward etc, then >that would be different, G'Day Elias, Mike and Paddlewise, Interesting analysis, though I hope and suspect that like computer generated music, computer designed kayaks will only ever be a small niche market. Are cars designed this way? Re modular kayaks, seems we could again learn from the past. I have never seen craft so beautiful as the sailing boats built by the Indonesians and the Torres Strait Islanders a few centuries ago. Apparently there was quite a trade in dugout hulls which were exported from the Indonesian mainland, where hardwood was readily available. They were sold all over the Torres Strait Islands where they were outfitted with decks, mast, sails and rigging wonderfully constructed from palm leaf, bamboo and lines woven from hemp. All the best, PeterO *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
The analogy between kayak designs and software is not very good. In software, the mechanics of how it works is hidden after it is compiled. With a boat everything about it is out there for anyone's inspection. What you sort of seem to be asking for is a complete set of lines for the boat be freely available, preferably in electronic form. The design isn't the electronic file, it is the boat itself. On Aug 14, 2004, at 4:01 AM, Elias Ross wrote: > * The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0). If I sell you plans you can use them to make a race car. Doesn't matter to me. > * The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your > needs (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for > this. If you build one of my designs you can paddle it with your eyes open and watch what it does and learn everything you want about the design. > * The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor > (freedom 2). I don't want you to distribute copies of my plans or finished boats without my permission, but all your friends can try it and watch you in the boat and learn just about everything there is to know about the design. They can use this knowledge as they see fit. I only ask you don't make a copy of my plans, or use the forms for my design. > * The freedom to improve the program, and release your > improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits > (freedom 3). Access to the source code is a precondition for this. > My licensing agreement (build one boat from my plans, or pay a royalty for additional boats) does not keep you from coming up with your own design which uses ideas from mine. "Source code" is not required, it just makes it easier. You can see the shape and make any measurements you choose. What benefit does the designer get from making the electronic CAD files available? The benefit appears to be one-way. > I spend a bit of my time helping out these projects because: 1. I > use free software and feel obliged to contribute because if I don't, > who will? 2. I enjoy the pride of seeing my contributions out there, > the name recognition is nice as well. 3. It's fun. 4. Helps my > resume, it looks good to employers. With software there is a mechanism for being sure credit is passed along where credit is due, either through comments in the code or a change log. There is no similar mechanism for a boat. Should a list of all contributers be laminated into the glass? > If kayak designs were like free software, expert paddles and even > average paddlers might contribute changes or suggestions. (People can > make suggestions now, but let's say the designer ignored your pleas: > Your own changes could be incorporated in a related design.) What if > there was a "bug" database for kayaks, where design defects or > suggestions could be tracked? Define a "bug" in a kayak. It is not as if there is such a thing as "too stable" it is at best "more stable than I like." Some people want a stiff tracking boat, other like it loose. One person's "bug" is often another's "feature". > > With appropriate design collaboration software (e-mail?) maybe > somebody would develop the Linux of kayaks. (Penguin shaped!?) Maybe we should work on the Linux of shoes first. The market is bigger. We wouldn't need as big malls if everyone could agree on a standardized shoe. One-size-fits-all has the potential to work in operating systems, but doesn't really make sense in kayaks. For better or worse, kayak design has a lot to do with "style". This is not just "style" in the form of what a kayak looks like, but includes the waters people paddle, what they do when they are on the water, and their expectations of what the kayak will do for them. > > Anyway, free designs could be downloaded and customized for different > people: Maybe some of these designs would be appropriate for home > builders (plywood or strip construction), others would be published > for commercial development (fiberglass or plastic). Any of your > changes would have to be released. If you change a loft line or two, > you would be obligated to publish the new dimensions and acknowledge > that whoever still "owned" the original design, though he may or may > not have approved it. (Typically, under free software you have the > freedom to keep the changes to your self if you don't redistribute > them.) > > How would designers make money? Well, the same way that Linus makes > money: Business and software consulting. Customization. Branding. > What impulse would there be to design something new? Fun. The market for customized designs is vanishingly small. I do about 5 a year. If I could charge $5,000 for each design, this might provide a living of baloney and wonderbread. And if were easy for people to make their own modifications, this market would shrink and the rate I could charge would drop. I currently charge much less, with the expectation that I will be able to sell the customized design to other customers in the future. As a practical matter I have several design which I give away for free. I have never had anyone send back a file with an "improvement" on one of these designs. I have had several people use the plans in unexpected ways, but there does not seem to be any groundswell in people giving back. What I have seen is people make small modifications to my designs, call them "new" and sell them. Nick Schade Guillemot Kayaks 824 Thompson St Glastonbury, CT 06033 USA Ph/Fx: (860) 659-8847 http://www.guillemot-kayaks.com/ *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Nick Schade wrote: > The analogy between kayak designs and software is not very good. In > software, the mechanics of how it works is hidden after it is compiled. > With a boat everything about it is out there for anyone's inspection. Well, software is far from opaque. It's fairly easy to disassmble machine code and figure out how it works. It's also fairly easy to take a set of inputs and compare its outputs. You can get at the essence of what a program does with some effort. > What you sort of seem to be asking for is a complete set of lines for > the boat be freely available, preferably in electronic form. The design > isn't the electronic file, it is the boat itself. If you're going to be making your own modified version a boat, you still have to buy or construct the boat itself. Then you can accurately measure. > My licensing agreement (build one boat from my plans, or pay a royalty > for additional boats) does not keep you from coming up with your own > design which uses ideas from mine. "Source code" is not required, it > just makes it easier. You can see the shape and make any measurements > you choose. What benefit does the designer get from making the > electronic CAD files available? The benefit appears to be one-way. If the lines or build instructions were used to build a different boat, the same instructions would be available to the designer. If I build a boat for, say, my 9-year old, from your modified plans, you would receive the same modifications present in my boat. The benefit is you (well, everyone) would have plans suitable for everyone. > With software there is a mechanism for being sure credit is passed along > where credit is due, either through comments in the code or a change > log. There is no similar mechanism for a boat. Should a list of all > contributers be laminated into the glass? No, the analogy is this, and I don't know believe (personally) that the analogy is 100% accurate: Program source code : Commerical Product :: Kayak plans : Finished boat Contributors would be listed in the source code/plans, not the finished product. > Define a "bug" in a kayak. It is not as if there is such a thing as "too > stable" it is at best "more stable than I like." Some people want a > stiff tracking boat, other like it loose. One person's "bug" is often > another's "feature". Have you heard the joke about Microsoft calling their bugs "features"? Clearly, a given boat has characteristics suitable for one paddler over another. But let's say, given a set of "use cases" (software development term), the boat has inherent defects (fails given the plan's construction techniques) these could be corrected by the manufacturer. For example, if a skeg box were to leak due to its design, or hatches leak, the coaming crack when entering, foot pedals slipping, lee cocking etc. Some of these involve construction details, some ergonomics, some hull design. > Maybe we should work on the Linux of shoes first. The market is bigger. > We wouldn't need as big malls if everyone could agree on a standardized > shoe. One-size-fits-all has the potential to work in operating systems, > but doesn't really make sense in kayaks. For better or worse, kayak > design has a lot to do with "style". This is not just "style" in the > form of what a kayak looks like, but includes the waters people paddle, > what they do when they are on the water, and their expectations of what > the kayak will do for them. The analogy with software breaks down here, I agree. Software design is very messy, you can add things to make a given product suitable for a wider range of customers without hurting its suitability for the original group. And though the suitability of a boat for a person and paddling condition determines design, designs are borrowed from other designs. Software is much this way. A word processor and spreadsheet don't have much in common, but the fundamentals are shared. > As a practical matter I have several design which I give away for free. > I have never had anyone send back a file with an "improvement" on one of > these designs. I have had several people use the plans in unexpected > ways, but there does not seem to be any groundswell in people giving > back. What I have seen is people make small modifications to my designs, > call them "new" and sell them. Free software is, perhaps paradoxically, protected and enabled by copyright law. Copyright ensures Microsoft can't steal code from Linux. If Linux were public domain, people would do the same things you describe: Make changes and sell the software for profit, which benefits only a few. I was considering the possible consequences of the protection of boat design, not advocating that designers give things away for people to steal. But if boat designs were protected by law, I think there is a chance there would community developing around producing "community designs." Whether or not they would be developed commercially or just by hobbists is a good question. (And I am not here to advocate boat designers do such a thing if there were such a law, or condemn or push those who don't.) The reason that people do not give back as you describe, is there is no such obligation under law. And there is no "enabling technology" in place that allows for information to be shared and updated easily. (This mailing list is a good example!) Personally, I think it is wrong to steal somebody's design, change it, and sell as "new". This goes against the overall philosophy. *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
On Aug 17, 2004, at 2:34 PM, Elias Ross wrote: > But if boat designs were protected by law, I think there is a chance > there would community developing around producing "community designs." > Whether or not they would be developed commercially or just by > hobbists is a good question. (And I am not here to advocate boat > designers do such a thing if there were such a law, or condemn or push > those who don't.) The reason that people do not give back as you > describe, is there is no such obligation under law. And there is no > "enabling technology" in place that allows for information to be > shared and updated easily. (This mailing list is a good example!) I really don't have any problem with the idea of a "open-source" style design database. I've actually had ideas along those lines myself. There are some logistical problems for design sharing (file format etc.) , but using a program like Ross Leidy's "KayakFoundary" http://www.blueheronkayaks.com/kayak/index.html most of them could be overcome. If you think it is really a good idea, all you need to do is start it. Use KayakFoundary to create a design and put it out there for people to work with. The design files are covered by all the same copyright laws as software. Finished boats are protected under the Vessel Hull Design Protection Act. I think this sort of project could become a wonderful resource, but I don't have the time. Nick Schade Guillemot Kayaks 824 Thompson St Glastonbury, CT 06033 USA Ph/Fx: (860) 659-8847 http://www.guillemot-kayaks.com/ *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
On Sat, Aug 14, 2004 at 01:01:27AM -0700, Elias Ross wrote: > It was interesting reading about software and kayaks: I spend a bit of > my free time and some work time developing "free software", which is > "free as in freedom". I'm many of you out there have heard of Linux, or > maybe the web browser Mozilla or HTTP server Apache. Or "the Internet", which would not exist with open-source software, and was busy being constructed on it long before the term "open-source" was coined and added to the lexicon. See, for example: Information Wants to be Valuable http://www.netaction.org/articles/freesoft.html It's not an accident that every significant Internet technology developed in the past 20+ years has been created and refined in this environment: open-source facilitates peer review, sharing of ideas, collaboration, and continuous improvement -- which is why the aberration of closed-source is rapidly dying, a development which scares the hell out of some people. > Software design isn't exactly boat design, in that boats are probably > best designed by one hand. Does this analogy make any sense? > And--currently--designs can't be protected like software can. Actually, they can (depending on which legal jurisdiction you find yourself in) be copyrighted or patented, as applicable. I'm not necessarily saying this is a good thing or a bad thing, I'm just saying that it's a possibility. > If kayak designs were like free software, expert paddles and even > average paddlers might contribute changes or suggestions. (People can > make suggestions now, but let's say the designer ignored your pleas: > Your own changes could be incorporated in a related design.) What if > there was a "bug" database for kayaks, where design defects or > suggestions could be tracked? This is an interesting idea. Whitewater slalom kayak/canoe designs are licensed: the way it works is that every boat made using design X results in a fee to the person(s) who came up with design X. But since the major driving forces behind changes in the designs are universal, it's not uncommon for multiple designers to independently come up with the same kinds of changes (e.g. forward shift in C-2 cockpits in the 90's) at the same time. Happily, nobody seems to get very upset about this: I think in part this is because nearly everyone knows nearly everyone else and getting snippy about it would serve no useful purpose. [ Compare and constrast with the flurry of completely ridiculous software patents -- a silly concept to begin with -- being rammed through an absolutely computer-illiterate USPTO, to whom the phrase "prior art" and the concept "obviousness" seem to have no meaning whatsoever. This approach is being used by companies which can't compete on merit to strangle competition and innovation with litigation. See "SCO" or the man behind their curtain, Microsoft. ] Anyway, the sharing of data might be easier to accomplish in this sphere because people are used to it: with very few exceptions, most folks are quite amenable to passing along their ideas and discoveries for the mutual benefit of all. That sort of mindset may make it easier to establish a common pool of knowledge than in some other areas...or at least, I hope so: we should have all figured out by now that together we know far more than we do separately. ---Rsk *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:33:38 PDT