Hi David, Thank You for the advice to write to John directly for the dxf files which I have done. Luckily I can study the drawings of your tender to Sibling in the meantime which really seems to be much easier to build and it is a perfect answer to the cash prize competitions initial definition with free download to members including dxf files and now that Arne has said he is working on his boat for dummys instructions I am also looking forward to study them. John Perry seems to be retired and that may be the cause for no updates on his GP Pram design.

Good, Kevin.
Now I am pondering on writing a how-to on how to assemble my boat. I aim for the same basic way with either the Halibut or Medium Boy designs. I need to sort this out for myself, since I am a mediocre carpenter and have never built a dinghy before.
I bet it will end up looking like a sort of «Dinghy-building for Dummies  -  by one of them».

Arne

Edit: Here is a glimpse of a test setup I have in mind. By building right side up, one can finish the boat on the inside, thwarts, paint and all before releasing it from the moulds.

Then one can turn the thing upside-down and possibly glass the bottom, fit, skegs, or whatever.

(..see also Arne's sketches, section 6-24)

I wrote:

Graeme wrote:

I wonder if a more practical set of criteria would be not for a TENDER, but instead for a "JUNKET BOAT" - a general-purpose sailing dinghy which does not want an outboard, and which can be easily transported for those who are unable or for whom it is inconvenient at the time to travel to a junket under sail. Ideally it would be transportable on a car top (just) or with a very light trailer, and able to accommodate an air mattress/sleeping bag/canopy arrangement (just).

These two almost contradictory criteria intersect at about 12'.

Swapping boats and rigs at a junket, and letting bystanders have a go, would be rather fun.

The Welsford design [Golden Bay] (12'9") just sneaks in. All John Welsford has to do is modify the plan to provide an offset centreboard case and removable thwart. (Marcus reckons narrow side buoyancy tanks and short centre thwart which just drops into place for rowing. The ideal for me would be a single off-centreboard case incorporated into a side buoyancy tank, with a long swinging board for sailing in shallow bays, and for variable CLR.

All John Welsford has to do is modify the plan to provide an offset centreboard case and removeable thwart. (Marcus reckons narrow side buoyancy tanks and short centre thwart which just drops into place for rowing. The ideal for me would be a single off-centreboard case incorporated into a side buoyancy tank, with a long swinging board for sailing in shallow bays, and for variable CLR.

We don't need a sail plan. I am sure people like David, Arne, Sieve, Paul etc can come up with a suitable variety.

They row beautifully.

Here's mine

I agree absolutely, Graeme. This is what the JRA should be sponsoring and encouraging, a one-design Junket Boat, not a design for a tender. 

I agree, too, with the idea of having two side tanks with parallel sides that are just far enough apart to fit an air mattress of the Thermarest type in between. The removable thwart that can be slid fore and aft for rowing from different positions with one, two or three aboard, or removed for camping, is perfect. Given that, you have a versatile, easily built boat for Junkets, family pottering and minimalist dinghy cruising. Spot on. Again, there's no need to reinvent the wheel over and over again. The Golden Bay, with changes to the interior, fits the brief very well.

Hi,

I have found the complete documentation of John Perry s boat on the JRA Website which is really very detailed and the pdf is already downloaded in my  Boat Plans folder. The only thing is that I still do not know where to get the .dxf files to have a look at all parts and their dimensions.

I have to agree with Arne. The winner is a beautiful little sail boat, the perfect solution to a little cruising sail boat for a keen teenager. The plans are beautifully presented and details carefully thought out. In terms of safety as well as performance, this should win a prize for the best sail boat.

But it is (in my opinion) not particularly outstanding as a tender, probably the most expensive to build, by no means simple to build and therefore probably outside the very loose criteria of the competition.

I write this with respect to the judge of the competition, who has taken great care to be fair and transparent, and make clear his reasons for the choice. This shows how widely opinions vary on the subject of small boats, as does the wide variety of entries, all of which had their very good points.

It should also be pointed out that any one of us could have had the chance to participate in the judging, but chose not to. The problem for me is that while the criteria were clear enough to possibly eliminate a couple of the entries, they were loose enough that in the end it would never have been possible to choose a winner to everyone’s satisfaction. David Ch stepped up and did the difficult job impartially and creditably, so hats off to David.

It was never of much interest to me which of the entries would “win”. The exciting thing was the variety of response and the excellence of all the different entries. The depth of talent within the JRA resulted in a suite of lovely dinghy designs of all shapes and sizes, a permanent and valuable asset for all members. And also, the competition generated a fair amount of interesting discussion, the consensus being “its horses for courses”. I feel the “competition” was a great success and I offer my compliments to the instigators, all the entrants, the judge, and the eventual winner. But especially the entrants.

As an afterthought, it would be a shame if this resource were now to be quietly forgotten. The pity is, most of the publicity centred around the JRA forum, which is probably not followed by a large proportion of the members. The magazine, which we all read, would have been (and continues to be) the better repository for a permanent record.  It would be good now if the design suite, with drawings and brief comments from designers, could be published in the magazine in its entirety.