Francis Cooke: Cruising Hints - 1935 yacht design, equipment

[PeterSibley]

Does anyone know this book ? It looks interesting and there is a copy available locally .

Peter

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

Yes, very well. you should buy it if the price is halfway reasonable. Note that the six editions differ considerably. The fifth and sixth are perhaps the best. The drawings of Bevil Warrington-Smyth's design "Marie Michon" may interest you.

[Wooden Boat Fittings]

.
Cooke wrote quite a few books, Peter. It's worth looking out for others as well (even though some of his material gets repeated from book to book.)

The nice thing about him and Smith and Hiscock and so on is that they experienced basic, amateur-level boating and wrote about it in detail directly from thier experiences -- including little things like how to rig a drop-leaf table properly, for instance....

Mike

[PeterSibley]

Thanks Andrew, thanks Mike . 5th Edition , 1935 .

[PeterSibley]

It arrived today ! Just as good as was suggested ....thank you both .:)

[PeterSibley]

Yes, very well. you should buy it if the price is halfway reasonable. Note that the six editions differ considerably. The fifth and sixth are perhaps the best. The drawings of Bevil Warrington-Smyth's design "Marie Michon" may interest you.

Unfortunately no "Marie Michon" ! Wrong edition I assume .:(

[Dick Wynne]

Peter, have a look here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dickw/sets/72157618337890385/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3145/3543752942_543285a918.jpg

The pages about her may be in the wrong order, but they and her lines drg are all there

Incidentally Harrison Butler's own VINDILIS (mentioned in my 6th Ed copy of the book) has just been restored in Scotland and is for sale here (http://www.aandrwayboatbuilding.co.uk/restoration.html)

[Don Kurylko]

I’m curious Dick. In the pages posted on the link, the writer states that Marie Michon carries a total ballast of 2 tons on the keel and 2.5 tons inside (10,080 lbs in all). Yet the page with the statistics shows that she measures out at 8 tons TM, which is more like 6 actual tons displacement - 13,440 lbs (or thereabouts). Surely, the ballast numbers are wrong. Perhaps 2.5 tons total ballast, not 4.5. That would make more sense.

Is there anymore detail about this design in the book? I think this would be a fine little vessel to build and sail. Thanks for posting the drawings, etc.

[PeterSibley]

Dick ,that was extraordinarily kind of you ! Thank you .I rather wish I had discovered this particular design before I went to the trouble of designing my own !

Those images were great (except 0124 , page 117 ....I can't make it out ,a little out of focus ).

[PeterSibley]

Don ,I suspect the inside ballast might be 1/2 ton .It would be about right as trimming .If Andrew drops by he may comment .

[PeterSibley]

Does anyone remember a boat by the name of "Corineus " from an article in WB 85 1988 ? To my eye there is a strong similarity between "Corineus " and "Marie Michon" ,the exception being that "Corineus " had all inside ballast .Otherwise flush decks ,displacement ,dimensions and rig are very similar .

[Graeme Forrest]

Don
The 8 tons TM is "Thames Measurement" a rating rule developed by the Royal Thames Yacht Club for racing approx mid 19th century. It was used in the UK as a general indication of relative boat size until well into the 1960s. The formula uses "length between perpendiculars" ( fore side of stem to aft side if the rudder post at deck level) and beam only.
length minus beam multplied by beam squared divided by 188.

Hence English boats tend to be rather narrow.
For similar types of boats the formula gives a surprisingly accurate indication of a boats relative size, an 8 tonner would be about 28 to 30ft long.
Graeme

[Dick Wynne]

Those images were great (except 0124 , page 117 ....I can't make it out ,a little out of focus ).

You know that you can click on 'All Sizes' above the smallish version of the snap which appears when you click on the thumbnail of each page, and you can then see it in all its glory...

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

"Marie Michon" was designed by Bevil Warrington-Smythe for Ralph Swann and built fishing boat style (larch on oak, iron fastened) by Gilbert and Pascoe at Porthleven in Cornwall. The ballast figures are right I think for the outside ballast but the two tons inside was probably just a guess. Flush deck with skylight - in fact her skylight and companion came from a Bristol Channel pilot cutter that was conveniently wrecked at the mouth of the Helford River just as her deck was going on. No engine. Down below she was rather simple. She had a big sail area (roller reefing) rather in the French manner.

She was sailed to Mariehamm in Finland (to look at the Gustav Eriksson fleet of windjammers) and back in the early thirties. This was reckoned a good voyage in those days and she won an RCC cup for it. My father was the crew and he liked her very much indeed. So did Captain Eriksson, who arranged her lay up over winter and took her out for a fews spins singlehanded.

In the Fifties she was sold to Northern Ireland; she parted her mooring in a gale, went ashore and broke up.

[PeterSibley]

You know that you can click on 'All Sizes' above the smallish version of the snap which appears when you click on the thumbnail of each page, and you can then see it in all its glory...

Thanks Dick ,I live and learn .All good images now .

[Don Kurylko]

Peter, I suspect that half ton inside ballast is more like it. And, yes, Corineus is similar, also Cockle - a strong family resemblance all around.

Graeme, thanks, I’m familiar with the Thames Measurement rule. Generally, though, the actual displacement of the boat is considerably less than the stated TM tonnage. I was just trying to point out that 10,000 lbs of ballast in a boat displacing around 14,000 lbs is a bit much. I was hoping there might be some clarification of that in the book somewhere, but Andrew kind of cleared it up by suggesting it was just a guess anyway.

A lovely little boat indeed! Sure wish there were more photos of her somewhere.

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

She is a very heavy displacement type; because she has no overhangs to speak of, and no hollow in her sections, she's not really much smaller than "Mirelle", which has 3.5 tons on the keel and a ton inside, on a displacement of nine or ten tons depending on how much clobber I've got on board. .I'd not be surprised to find a couple of tons of inside ballast in Marie Michon. She has the same sail area as Mirelle.

Remember that the inside ballast was just added until the boat floated on her marks - nothing scientific about it

She was one of my father's two favourite boats (the other was the Hambly pilot skiff called the "black" Cariad). In tribute to her, Mirelle copies her sail colour scheme, with everything tanned red apart from the topsail and balloon staysail which are blue.

[Dick Wynne]

I’m curious Dick. In the pages posted on the link, the writer states that Marie Michon carries a total ballast of 2 tons on the keel and 2.5 tons inside (10,080 lbs in all). Yet the page with the statistics shows that she measures out at 8 tons TM, which is more like 6 actual tons displacement - 13,440 lbs (or thereabouts). Surely, the ballast numbers are wrong. Perhaps 2.5 tons total ballast, not 4.5. That would make more sense.

Is there anymore detail about this design in the book? I think this would be a fine little vessel to build and sail. Thanks for posting the drawings, etc.

The book isn't indexed Don but I just flicked through and I think that's all Cooke wrote. Fortunately others with better knowledge than me have picked up on the measurement/ballast question! Such anomalies are not uncommon as I found with Constance, she appears to be unbuildable in trad timber to the designed displacement, unless you go for cedar planking and radio control, which is why we had to enlarge her slightly all round in the build.

[Don Kurylko]

You’re probably right Andrew. Corineus, which has very similar dimensions but a tad less draft and a shorter waterline length (25’ as opposed to 25.7’), weighs in at 7.17 tons displacement. So, MM could easily be 8 tons or more. That’s heavy!

Thanks Dick, I’m getting the picture! I think...:rolleyes:

[PeterSibley]

MM is an unusual type these days ,I wonder why ? She is certainly very attractive to my eye .If I started a thread up in design would the current readers participate ? It would be good to hear a few opinions and expose her to a wider viewing .

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

She was not unusual when she was built; we have got used to lighter displacements but there is a lot to be said for heavy! For one thing, nicer motion at sea. She is pretty comparable with Falmouth Quay Punts and, on a larger scale, Bristol Channel pilot skiffs.