: I have some prejudices on this but little knowledge. And it is all a moot
: point if the skin adheres under normal practices anyway(well foldables). I
: think that if the frame breaks in an attached skin, that there is way more
: likely to be skin damage. And that the unattached skin allows both the
: frame or the skin to be stressed to their limits more readily. (I wanted
: to exclude this, but I bet punctures are harder w/ the tradional because
: the skin can move more). But those walrus truss sides look strong strong
: strong.

Mick,

Like you I have little data. I can see your point, but it is hard to compare the two if the frames are different in design. The beams, stringers, etc in the Walrus appear to me to be much more hefty than those in a traditional boat. Not that that's better, but the traditional boat seems to be designed more to flex, with joints that are literally tied together. The Walrus is a rigid "glued and screwed" structure. The strength of the traditional boat comes from relieving stress through flexing while the Wally handles it through brute force. I think the Wally can get away with attached skins because skin stress is probably minimal. The traditional boat, however, would require a more robust system that is capable of handling changes. Of course this would also be dependent on the skin (how stretchable / strong is the skin, are the sewn seams stronger than the alternative staples or tacks, etc).

On the other hand, if I found myself in conditions where the failure of the boat structure was likely, I think the construction method would be the last thing on my mind But then, I'd use the same argument on the single versus multiple glass layers debate too.

Are you planning on doing some "testing" that we don't know about?? :-)

Bill