Canoe stern and following seas
- Thread starter Drinky Crow
- Start date
I’ve read that a canoe stern might get pooped more easily than a wide transom b/c it does not rise as fast under the on-coming following sea. Recall, the vessel’s buoyancy is a function of displacement. The pointy ends (double enders) generate less displacement than the wide amidships.
I recall a documentary on the engineering challenge of building the later WWII battleships. The desire for a long slender bow, with the need to support the heavy guns amidships, where most of the buoyancy resided, also meant that engineers had to design a method of supporting the load of bow aft, near the area of the guns.
I recall a documentary on the engineering challenge of building the later WWII battleships. The desire for a long slender bow, with the need to support the heavy guns amidships, where most of the buoyancy resided, also meant that engineers had to design a method of supporting the load of bow aft, near the area of the guns.
Last edited:
Canoe stern and following seas
What could go wrong? Somewhere on the ethernet someone said bad combination?
There is what someone, somewhere said and then there are Colin Archer boats, Take you pick on who has a track record.
Gary
What could go wrong? Somewhere on the ethernet someone said bad combination?
There is what someone, somewhere said and then there are Colin Archer boats, Take you pick on who has a track record.
Gary
I'd say that you should all consult with Leif Erickson......
There are an awful lot of double enders sailing blue water. Been doing it, as sailme88 suggests, for a lot longer than transomed boats. There are definately design considerations, but the general statement sounds waaaaay off to me.
-Will (Dragonfly)
-Will (Dragonfly)
jssailem
SBO Weather and Forecasting Forum Jim & John
- Oct 22, 2014
- 22,387
This is also found in the Ethernet. It was said by someone... “good enough for life-boats”.
This guy has some thoughts about them, I think he knows what he’s talking about.
Personally I like the look of double Enders but probably wouldn’t own one.
www.sailfarlivefree.com
Personally I like the look of double Enders but probably wouldn’t own one.
Double Enders According to Perry (Guest Post by Bob Perry)
Inspired writing about sailing featuring personal ponderings, boat reviews, gear reviews, techniques, cruising guides,
For a long time, there was a belief that off shore boats should be heavy and slow and as the Perry article suggests, canoe stern. They would be safer and handle heavy seas better. Then along came Steve and Linda Dashew who suggested faster lighter boats were safer offshore with their Deerfoot lines. And the thinking began to change.
Boats with skinny butts are limited in their down wind sail carrying ability, especially with a spinnaker. There is not enough volume in the aft end to support the boat and the steering becomes squirrelly. The same problem arises on old IOR designed boats, they want to spin out and broach too quickly as compared to more modern boats with broader aft beams.
Canoe stern boats in wood are also harder to build because of the extreme twist in the planking at the aft ends. See Acorn to Arabella's recent videos about planking near the waterline.
Boats with skinny butts are limited in their down wind sail carrying ability, especially with a spinnaker. There is not enough volume in the aft end to support the boat and the steering becomes squirrelly. The same problem arises on old IOR designed boats, they want to spin out and broach too quickly as compared to more modern boats with broader aft beams.
Canoe stern boats in wood are also harder to build because of the extreme twist in the planking at the aft ends. See Acorn to Arabella's recent videos about planking near the waterline.
You know, it's interesting that, at the end of the article, he states that transom stern boats are better, but like the problem he had with some of his double end proponents he interviewed, he doesn't go into why. It all sounds entirely esthetic and based on speed, rather than any discussion of sea kindliness.
-Will (Dragonfly)
Not suggesting “bad” just not as good as a wide stern. From the article:
But there were all sorts of strange theories as to why the double ender was the best hull form for offshore. “The stern parts the following seas.” I call this the “Moses effect”. Maybe the stern parts the following sea because there is not enough buoyancy aft for the stern to rise to the following sea. “There is more reserve buoyancy aft.” This is certainly not true in a boat like a Westsail with almost no stern overhang at all. There is almost no buoyancy aft
But there were all sorts of strange theories as to why the double ender was the best hull form for offshore. “The stern parts the following seas.” I call this the “Moses effect”. Maybe the stern parts the following sea because there is not enough buoyancy aft for the stern to rise to the following sea. “There is more reserve buoyancy aft.” This is certainly not true in a boat like a Westsail with almost no stern overhang at all. There is almost no buoyancy aft
Great article.... thnxThis guy has some thoughts about them, I think he knows what he’s talking about.
Personally I like the look of double Enders but probably wouldn’t own one.
Double Enders According to Perry (Guest Post by Bob Perry)
Inspired writing about sailing featuring personal ponderings, boat reviews, gear reviews, techniques, cruising guides,
I would assume, big trouble there I know, that since he refers to buoyancy, or lack there of, with double enders that a transom stern adds buoyancy.
My boat has a big fat transom, so large in fact that I can get into all three lazerettes port, stbd, and stern and lay down in there. They’re huge! Provided I can keep water out they must provide great buoyancy, which is good because I have a massive cockpit with small drains(I’d like to add additional drains for offshore work)
the deerfoot boats are safer at sea because they can outrun the storms, right? with modern weather forecasting a sailor knows where the storms are. thanks jim and john. 
IOR boats had their masts more aft, a huge part of their awful driving. along with those ugly hull shapes
the only vessel i have seen (yes i watched) get broached, repeatedly, was a hunter design with a spinnaker flying that could not dump its main with the rig design it had. went over 80 ish degrees a dozen times.
IOR boats had their masts more aft, a huge part of their awful driving. along with those ugly hull shapes
the only vessel i have seen (yes i watched) get broached, repeatedly, was a hunter design with a spinnaker flying that could not dump its main with the rig design it had. went over 80 ish degrees a dozen times.
There are good designs and bad designs. I could come up with half a dozen reasons you don't want a transom stern at sea or a double ender. In the end, both designs have proven themselves capable.
Seamanship can conquer a lot of design "issues", not flaws. "Bad" is a relative term that needs more context.
-Will (Dragonfly)
Seamanship can conquer a lot of design "issues", not flaws. "Bad" is a relative term that needs more context.
-Will (Dragonfly)
have any of you guys been "pooped"?
have any of you guys taken serious blue water over the bow?
on my dad's US one design, alden racer. it took huge blue water over the bow many times in lake erie's short chop.
once on lake michigan, on aeolus, on a dead run, wing on wing, 25 knt wind true, i was pooped by a breaking wave. filled the cockpit up to the brim. aeolus has lots of buoyancy in it's stern.
i have never broached. knock on wood
i've seen huge blue water over the bow of big ships.
i've seen huge blue water "poop" big ships.
still here to talk about it
lesson learned? keep the hatches shut and hang on
have any of you guys taken serious blue water over the bow?
on my dad's US one design, alden racer. it took huge blue water over the bow many times in lake erie's short chop.
once on lake michigan, on aeolus, on a dead run, wing on wing, 25 knt wind true, i was pooped by a breaking wave. filled the cockpit up to the brim. aeolus has lots of buoyancy in it's stern.
i have never broached. knock on wood
i've seen huge blue water over the bow of big ships.
i've seen huge blue water "poop" big ships.
still here to talk about it
lesson learned? keep the hatches shut and hang on
Just one time at the bow, but not very “seriously”, racing in Clearwater Yacht Club’s Kahlua Cup in the early 1990’s in the Gulf of Mexico. It was night. One of those nasty cold fronts had passed through. (The Kahlua Cup was held in November.) Our one-design racer, a Hotfoot 20, had low freeboard. The skipper, who was at the tiller, shouted “big wave”, then a second or two later the wave washed over the bow and flooded into the cockpit. But with the open transom it cleared quickly. Left me with some doubt about whether we should be racing that boat in that particular race. (A least with my skill level at the time!) The second time was in a Jeanneau (Attalia) 32; that was much better.
, then a second or two later the wave washed over the bow and flooded into the cockpit. But with the open transom it cleared quickly. Left me with some doubt about whether we should be racing that boat in that particular race. (A least with my skill level at the time!) The second time was in a Jeanneau (Attalia) 32; that was much better.
Last edited: