Originally Posted by Lagoon4us
Thanks i thought that was the case, you've confirmed my hazy thoughts.
Now i believe the bridge-deck was then added without hull volume changes and that was not good for the marque....I'm not being critical i'm just trying to confirm history
and Factor of all people should know more..
It might help if you used the correct terminology. When you say bridgedeck I not unnaturally think you mean - well bridge deck
A Bridgedeck is the deck
between the hulls, if however you mean an a bridgedeck cabin
, no the first 18 odd boats had a soft top and the rest hard top. The hard top overall weight difference to the soft top is minimal, particularly after boat #4 when deisels were ditched and replaced with outboards. Indeed the first hardtop boat was lighter overall than the first soft top boats. In the attached photos, 1000-1 shows the bridgedeck that has been on all 1000s. It was never added requiring hull redesign, photo
1000-2 shows the initial boats with bridgedeck and soft top.
The 1160 was not a 1000 with a bridgedeck - or indeed anything else added to it, totally different boat, totally seperate set of moulds, and indeed a totally different construction technique. The 1000 is hulls joined by beams, the 1160 has only two external moulds, a single
hulls/bridgedeck and a saloon/deck.
The 1160 photos attached show the different configuration of the saloon
including the open view into the galley
So when you said that the 1000 had a bridgedeck added and should have had hull volume changes to make an 1160, well - you can understand my confusion.
The idea of taking a design and then adding hull volume to it to fix a design displacement
problem is not something that makes much sense in any event. If you add hull volume without any other change, and without an overall analysis, all you do is make a fat boat, and very few designers go down that path if they want a boat that sails
Now i believe the bridge-deck was then added without hull volume changes and that was not good for the marque
Your proposition appeared to me to be that the 1000 started without a bridgedeck and had one added, that it is incorrect, or that the 1000 had a bridgedeck cabin
added to make an 1160, that too is incorrect or that the addittion of the hardtop to the 1000 required fatter hulls, again incorrect. I apologise if I misunderstood your proposition, but they were the three "ideas" I drew from your comments.
In short 1000 - always had a bridgedeck - started with softtop, went to hardtop, little or no overall displacement
1160 is not a 1000 with a bridgedeck added.
And the 1160 hull beam width is in fact different to the 1000 in any event.
i'm just trying to confirm history and Factor of all people should know more
You want a history lesson on Seawinds - happy to oblige, I have been on almost every one ever launched since the start of 850 series. I suspect most here though would be bored by that.
Also been on most Lightwaves, and at least one representative of each model in the FP and Lagoon
lines, the recent Outremers, and a few of the older Outremer
designs, And a smattering of Schionnings, (Both Craig and Jeff) and Pescotts and Chamberlains and lots of Graingers as well as a lot of crowthers, lidgards, simpsons and many many others. Really Really Really want to get a lump of sea time on a Chris White Atlantic 57 and Hammerhead Tri, I think I would really enjoy both those boats, but not too many of them in this part of the world.