Re:Cal 40/29 Beam drawing

Charlie suggested: > Mark, I think you just need to make the CAL 40 drawing a little smaller. : - ] The Cal 29 beam drawing that Roger Jones made should be floating around in a number of places on the Web by now, but I've attached one here. Note that we saved some fab costs by having the top flange simply rolled from the web material, and then had the three tabs welded in place. It meant for a lot less welding, and probably less cutting, too. Alfred Poor 1973 Tartan 34C #288 "Jambalaya"

Of course, I was kidding based on underside similarities. The forces obviously go up much faster than the linear dimensions. Birds have skinny legs and elephants have huge ones for a reason. I'm told that the linear dimensions must increase as the square root of the cube based on mass (and force). A curiosity. Having seen many different encapsulated keel CAL undersides, I would note that the rudders do not increase in size proportionally with boat size (at least it seems that way). If true, Howcum? Allen mentioned the difference in tab placement on the beams. On my end, I have worked on a lot of CAL 25s. There are many differences just within that flat-top product line over time. In addition to obvious changes, stern plates do not fit other boats, backstay tangs are placed differently, lead keel slugs were different, hatch cut-outs do not match, and so forth. Point is, one must be careful when buying scavenged/rebuilt parts for a model of boat. Cheers Charlie From: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com [mailto:Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Alfred Poor Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 9:49 AM To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Subject: [Cal_Boats] Re:Cal 40/29 Beam drawing [1 Attachment] [Attachment(s) from Alfred Poor included below] Charlie suggested: > Mark, I think you just need to make the CAL 40 drawing a little smaller. : - ] The Cal 29 beam drawing that Roger Jones made should be floating around in a number of places on the Web by now, but I've attached one here. Note that we saved some fab costs by having the top flange simply rolled from the web material, and then had the three tabs welded in place. It meant for a lot less welding, and probably less cutting, too. Alfred Poor 1973 Tartan 34C #288 "Jambalaya" Attachment(s) from Alfred Poor 1 of 1 File(s) [http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/yg/img/doc/pdf16x16.gif] Cal 29 Beam Drawing.pdf<http://d.yimg.com/kq/groups/16485695/538246843/name/Cal%2029%20Beam%20Drawing%2Epdf>

Husar, Charlie [USA] wrote: > > > > > A curiosity. Having seen many different encapsulated keel CAL > undersides, I would note that the rudders do not increase in size > proportionally with boat size (at least it seems that way). If true, > Howcum? You could pose this as a question to Robert Perry, who has started writing a series of boat-design articles for /Good Old Boat/ magazine. Ted Brewer wrote an earlier series nbut now they've got Perry writing from his perspective. We could guess that on larger boats, the spade rudder is farther from the fin keel, giving it more "leverage." You need les force farther from the pivot. Chris Campbell >

sometimes the same model was built in different plants, IE. east coast versus west coast. additional variations arose. Reggie To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com From: hu… [at] bah.com Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 10:44:55 -0400 Subject: [Cal_Boats] Re:Cal 40/29 Beam drawing Of course, I was kidding based on underside similarities. The forces obviously go up much faster than the linear dimensions. Birds have skinny legs and elephants have huge ones for a reason. I'm told that the linear dimensions must increase as the square root of the cube based on mass (and force). A curiosity. Having seen many different encapsulated keel CAL undersides, I would note that the rudders do not increase in size proportionally with boat size (at least it seems that way). If true, Howcum? Allen mentioned the difference in tab placement on the beams. On my end, I have worked on a lot of CAL 25s. There are many differences just within that flat-top product line over time. In addition to obvious changes, stern plates do not fit other boats, backstay tangs are placed differently, lead keel slugs were different, hatch cut-outs do not match, and so forth. Point is, one must be careful when buying scavenged/rebuilt parts for a model of boat. Cheers Charlie From: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com [mailto:Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Alfred Poor Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 9:49 AM To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Subject: [Cal_Boats] Re:Cal 40/29 Beam drawing [1 Attachment] Charlie suggested: > Mark, I think you just need to make the CAL 40 drawing a little smaller. : - ] The Cal 29 beam drawing that Roger Jones made should be floating around in a number of places on the Web by now, but I’ve attached one here. Note that we saved some fab costs by having the top flange simply rolled from the web material, and then had the three tabs welded in place. It meant for a lot less welding, and probably less cutting, too. Alfred Poor 1973 Tartan 34C #288 “Jambalaya” Attachment(s) from Alfred Poor 1 of 1 File(s) Cal 29 Beam Drawing.pdf