It is the latter type we are chiefly concerned with; how is it that the form has so deteriorated as to create this concern in our minds? I think the cause is not far to seek; it appears to be the outcome of (1) the shipowner's desire to carry the maximum number of persons in the minimum number of boats; (2) in the efforts of the ship-builder, as a rule, to carry out the specification in which he has contracted to supply the owners with boats at a price, often very low, and naturally he does not sublet his contract with the boatbuilder at a loss; (3) the aim of the competing boatbuilder, which is to build his boats at as little cost price as possible, and yet to provide accommodation for the prescribed number of persons. He is probably limited as to length, and therefore relies on the breadth and depth; in this direction, he is unintentionally assisted by the board's rule for measurement, viz,
| L × B × D × .6 10 |
or 8; so long, therefore, as he can obtain his breadth at one point for measurement purposes, it is quite immaterial to him how soon he fines away to the ends, with the result that the stability of the boat becomes almost entirely dependent upon the form of a very limited midship section, or the still smaller proportion of same that would be under water when in the loaded condition.
The boatbuilder may be further restricted as to breadth, and, therefore, he again detracts from the form a boat should have by dispensing with sheer and increasing the depth from keel to gunwale amidships. This method of building boats enables him to obtain the capacity required by the owner at the expense of the boat's stability and utility.
No doubt when the life-saving appliances rules came into being the divisors 10 and 8 for the different sections were deemed safe on the supposition that the usual full form of boat would not be largely departed from. Experience has shown, however, that form is frequently sacrificed for the unworthy objects referred to above, and it follows, therefore, that either the form should be improved or a heavier divisor laid down.
It would, I think, be more effective to deal with form and devise a rule by which we can insure that a boat will be reasonably safe with its load, not merely in smooth water, as in our recent test, but in a seaway. It is essential, therefore, to draw the attention of the advisory committee to the value the board attach to form, and particularly to that part of it under water, emphasizing the great necessity there is for an increase to the bearing surface of the under-water portion of boats, and this end can, no doubt, be best attained by the putting into practice of the suggestions made by the principal ship surveyor for amending the rules and which aim at prolonging the form or fullness of dimension of the midship body under water well toward the ends of the boat. It is well known that by extending the body in this way greater buoyancy and stability are secured without materially affecting the speed. It is often supposed that defective stability due to bad form can be rectified by the disposition of the persons or things, but anyone with real experience of boats in a seaway can not fail to realize that this is the wrong principle to work on. Granted, therefore, that the question of form must take priority, how can it be best attained? And if we refer to Mr. Archer's method of measurement, as stated in his amendment to the rules, it will be seen how simple and effective it is. For the purpose of illustration, we might take the model of a ship's boat obtained through the board's surveyors at Glasgow, the dimensions of which enlarged to scale represent a boat of
|
L B D 30.0 × 8.5 × 3.5 |
and is an embodiment of the proportions amidships and at quarter distance from each end proposed by Mr. Archer.
It can not be too strongly urged that for a ship's lifeboat to be fit to carry the number of persons it measures for in any degree of safety, whenever it may be required at sea, the under-water or bearing surface should be carried out to the ends as much as possible and all straight lines avoided. The bows of many of the existing types of boat are examples of the worst possible form for safety, and the counters are as bad, if they can be said to have any.
| Depth.—It appears from the reports that the most generally approved ratio of depth to the breadth is | 4 10. |