30-11-09, 03:57 PM
The canoe from hell
I was asked a short while ago what this canoe was called. For the life of me I could not remember. Well, having a few moments I had a walk down the garden to check it out. It is doing quite nicely, no signs of deterioration at all but it has transitioned from an ornament, into a planter within the space of some 18 months.
It proudly carries the name; “Voyager 430 Kiwi canoes” I recall trying to trace the makers, at the time I got it and heard that “Kiwi canoes” had been a small firm in North East England which was not active anymore. I did buy it from the same area, probably a coincidence. Where this firm found its market for this canoe is anyone’s guess. My guess would be sickly depressed Vikings being the best buyers.
I am not sure where it was christened, “The canoe from hell”, but a few seasoned canoeists had tried it on various outings.
My son says it was “Forged in the fires of Mount Doom” which I think is an overstatement. It is a bit odd and it does tend to raise more questions than it offers solutions. Looking at it, the first question that springs to mind is, what can I have possibly done to the designer for him to hate me so much?
Well, Ok, “Voyager 430”. “The 430 was the duration of the maiden voyage, in seconds, when I was chased northerly across the Leeds Liverpool Canal by the “Queen Mary” It listed to port slightly, changed its mind, flipped to starboard, and took the canal in black. For some reason, it didn’t actually sink on this occasion; I put it down to the viscosity of the canal. Whatever the circumstances, it is hard to get used to the transient feeling that all hope has gone, with the sudden shock of the warm comforting glass fibre fading from beneath you, being replaced in an instant by malevolent freezing sludge, as far as the eye can see. In reality of course, it is freezing, it is sludge, it is malevolent and it is as far as the eye can see.
On the other hand “Kiwi”, as names go, isn’t entirely inappropriate. I mean, as a bird it is difficult to imagine how it could possibly have evolved more uselessly. Of course we shouldn’t be fooled by the association with “Down under” including the brave new world of New Zealand. “Down under” is also “Davey Jones’s Locker”.
So what is the cause of this apparent freakishness? Until now I can’t say I had ever looked at it very seriously, or for that matter, with a critical eye, with one exception. The craft was fitted with two seats, both “T” shaped, as a part of its structural design, at the approx. One third and two third locations along its length from the bow. In the centre was what was described to me as a “child’s seat”, which I did not think about and ignored at first.
When the crafts characteristics’ started becoming apparent, I wandered about it because it is incredible to believe that anyone would ever contemplate taking a child out in this. I tried to examine the seat. No, it must be for kneeling, so I tried that, but the knees were brought centrally and the contours weren’t right. On closer examination the seat was a moulding of glass fibre, as you would expect the contours of a small child to be, so I tried it, thinking it isn’t a child’s seat at all, it’s a small adult solo afterthought. But no, had the contours been flatter it might have passed as such, but it was a fairly deep seat being very uncomfortable for an adult and ,even more alarming, it was fitted with hip straps. I never was able to fathom this, so I removed it.
I’ve never really thought much about why canoes do what they do, but I have been familiar with the lines of fishing craft down the ages. Manufacturers aren’t quick to portray “lines” in the sales stuff. They often give side and plan views in the sales literature. It is usually more difficult to compare contours.
“Lines” are the curvatures on a vessel. It is held that men have an “eye” for a boat. In that “If it looks right, it probably is”. Traditionally, back hundreds of years, lines have been projected onto paper or vellum by showing the side and plan views, and crucially, the shape of cross sections of the boat at given distances along it’s length. Some of the early records of Canadian canoes were preserved in this way by the British Admiralty, including paddles.
With regard to the length and beam, this lovely Kiwi shows nothing much out of the ordinary, being 17’ and 33’’ respectively.
It is symmetrical, back to front, and obviously from side to side, so I should be able to find the gremlin by examining a mere quarter of it.
The cross section at the widest point is almost a semi circle, but flattened slightly across the keel. It does have a keel, being half an inch deep and one and a half inches wide. It peters out towards the bow and stern.
The bow and stern are well rounded and high which give it the characteristic canoe appearance. It hasn’t been a particular problem in the wind, and as it heels the ends rise proud of the water so I don’t think this aspect of the design is too bad.
With regards to the lines between the bow and maximum beam, the shape runs round and full in a continuous curve. This “looks” quite good because it would be difficult to get it any sleeker. If you imagine a mirror image being placed on top, completing the four quarters and disregard the bow, it would be barrel shaped and practically cylindrical and here, I think is the problem. Assuming the “cylinder” was water tight; it would be happy in any orientation and could roll on its circumference.
In conclusion it isn’t really tippy at all. It is happy to adopt any heel depending on where your balance places it. This is disconcerting, especially for a beginner because it is unforgiving of even minor imbalances.
The second gremlin is common to many canoes. So much so that it might be considered a general characteristic. It tips over as soon as the bow grounds. I know some vessels have long term popularity even with this trait, because of otherwise good water keeping qualities. It might be exaggerated in the “Kiwi” because it wants to tip you out, possibly helped by the keel.
The one thing in its favour is that it has taught me good balance, and if I was stuck for a canoe I would use it again. However given the choice I have of using the Ontario, it is very unlikely. I would not sell this boat because in my view it is potentially dangerous for the unwary. Taking a very broad view though, I don’t regret paddling it, as its lines are a steep learning curve.
I was asked a short while ago what this canoe was called. For the life of me I could not remember. Well, having a few moments I had a walk down the garden to check it out. It is doing quite nicely, no signs of deterioration at all but it has transitioned from an ornament, into a planter within the space of some 18 months.
It proudly carries the name; “Voyager 430 Kiwi canoes” I recall trying to trace the makers, at the time I got it and heard that “Kiwi canoes” had been a small firm in North East England which was not active anymore. I did buy it from the same area, probably a coincidence. Where this firm found its market for this canoe is anyone’s guess. My guess would be sickly depressed Vikings being the best buyers.
I am not sure where it was christened, “The canoe from hell”, but a few seasoned canoeists had tried it on various outings.
My son says it was “Forged in the fires of Mount Doom” which I think is an overstatement. It is a bit odd and it does tend to raise more questions than it offers solutions. Looking at it, the first question that springs to mind is, what can I have possibly done to the designer for him to hate me so much?
Well, Ok, “Voyager 430”. “The 430 was the duration of the maiden voyage, in seconds, when I was chased northerly across the Leeds Liverpool Canal by the “Queen Mary” It listed to port slightly, changed its mind, flipped to starboard, and took the canal in black. For some reason, it didn’t actually sink on this occasion; I put it down to the viscosity of the canal. Whatever the circumstances, it is hard to get used to the transient feeling that all hope has gone, with the sudden shock of the warm comforting glass fibre fading from beneath you, being replaced in an instant by malevolent freezing sludge, as far as the eye can see. In reality of course, it is freezing, it is sludge, it is malevolent and it is as far as the eye can see.
On the other hand “Kiwi”, as names go, isn’t entirely inappropriate. I mean, as a bird it is difficult to imagine how it could possibly have evolved more uselessly. Of course we shouldn’t be fooled by the association with “Down under” including the brave new world of New Zealand. “Down under” is also “Davey Jones’s Locker”.
So what is the cause of this apparent freakishness? Until now I can’t say I had ever looked at it very seriously, or for that matter, with a critical eye, with one exception. The craft was fitted with two seats, both “T” shaped, as a part of its structural design, at the approx. One third and two third locations along its length from the bow. In the centre was what was described to me as a “child’s seat”, which I did not think about and ignored at first.
When the crafts characteristics’ started becoming apparent, I wandered about it because it is incredible to believe that anyone would ever contemplate taking a child out in this. I tried to examine the seat. No, it must be for kneeling, so I tried that, but the knees were brought centrally and the contours weren’t right. On closer examination the seat was a moulding of glass fibre, as you would expect the contours of a small child to be, so I tried it, thinking it isn’t a child’s seat at all, it’s a small adult solo afterthought. But no, had the contours been flatter it might have passed as such, but it was a fairly deep seat being very uncomfortable for an adult and ,even more alarming, it was fitted with hip straps. I never was able to fathom this, so I removed it.
I’ve never really thought much about why canoes do what they do, but I have been familiar with the lines of fishing craft down the ages. Manufacturers aren’t quick to portray “lines” in the sales stuff. They often give side and plan views in the sales literature. It is usually more difficult to compare contours.
“Lines” are the curvatures on a vessel. It is held that men have an “eye” for a boat. In that “If it looks right, it probably is”. Traditionally, back hundreds of years, lines have been projected onto paper or vellum by showing the side and plan views, and crucially, the shape of cross sections of the boat at given distances along it’s length. Some of the early records of Canadian canoes were preserved in this way by the British Admiralty, including paddles.
With regard to the length and beam, this lovely Kiwi shows nothing much out of the ordinary, being 17’ and 33’’ respectively.
It is symmetrical, back to front, and obviously from side to side, so I should be able to find the gremlin by examining a mere quarter of it.
The cross section at the widest point is almost a semi circle, but flattened slightly across the keel. It does have a keel, being half an inch deep and one and a half inches wide. It peters out towards the bow and stern.
The bow and stern are well rounded and high which give it the characteristic canoe appearance. It hasn’t been a particular problem in the wind, and as it heels the ends rise proud of the water so I don’t think this aspect of the design is too bad.
With regards to the lines between the bow and maximum beam, the shape runs round and full in a continuous curve. This “looks” quite good because it would be difficult to get it any sleeker. If you imagine a mirror image being placed on top, completing the four quarters and disregard the bow, it would be barrel shaped and practically cylindrical and here, I think is the problem. Assuming the “cylinder” was water tight; it would be happy in any orientation and could roll on its circumference.
In conclusion it isn’t really tippy at all. It is happy to adopt any heel depending on where your balance places it. This is disconcerting, especially for a beginner because it is unforgiving of even minor imbalances.
The second gremlin is common to many canoes. So much so that it might be considered a general characteristic. It tips over as soon as the bow grounds. I know some vessels have long term popularity even with this trait, because of otherwise good water keeping qualities. It might be exaggerated in the “Kiwi” because it wants to tip you out, possibly helped by the keel.
The one thing in its favour is that it has taught me good balance, and if I was stuck for a canoe I would use it again. However given the choice I have of using the Ontario, it is very unlikely. I would not sell this boat because in my view it is potentially dangerous for the unwary. Taking a very broad view though, I don’t regret paddling it, as its lines are a steep learning curve.
(all the owners swam
)