Date: 8/19/2003, 1:20 pm
: The person to whom I think you're referring had some interesting ideas about
: strip thickness and sequence and weight of glass layups. interesting, but
: nothing particularly earth shaking, as I recall.
: So, the short answer - you're not missing anything.
That was kind of what I was getting at. Why should anyone thank a particular person for "using his ideas" when noone know what that person's ideas are/were. Unless he was the father of the strip built boat, anything else is just built up on that original strip built idea. You can thicken the FG or wood all you want, there is nothing really new in doing so. As a matter of fact, there really isn't much that is truly new in this world and you can bet that if you thought of something, at least 10 other people have thought of it too. Without getting too far OT, I was into Kit Cars when I was younger and I lusted after building a Pantera replica. One problem facing high HP mid-engine replicars is the lack of a reasonably priced transaxle that can handle the high HP engines. I had an idea that I had come up with using readily available rear wheel drive transmissions and Corvette rear axles. A year later, in one of my kit car mags there was an article about a guy who did something similar and got a patent on it. I took some pride in thinking of an idea that was good enough to patent. I use that true story *only* to illustrate my reasoning for questioning yakmaster or yakman or whatever his name was. Please take it as that and forgive me for getting way OT.
Paul
Messages In This Thread
- Other: damage
john -- 8/15/2003, 3:19 pm- Re: Other: damage
Randy Oswald -- 8/18/2003, 5:17 pm- Re: Other: damage
Randy Oswald -- 8/18/2003, 5:20 pm
- Re: Other: damage
john -- 8/17/2003, 11:51 am- Re: Other: damage
Mike Hanks -- 8/17/2003, 9:51 pm- Re: Other: damage
john -- 8/19/2003, 1:32 am- Re: Other: damage
Mike Hanks -- 8/19/2003, 9:22 am
- Re: Other: damage
- Re: Other: damage *NM*
Mike Hanks -- 8/17/2003, 9:06 pm - Re: Other: damage
- Re: Other: damage
yakman -- 8/16/2003, 11:09 am- Re: Other: damage
Paul Probus -- 8/18/2003, 12:55 pm- Re: Other: damage
Jim Pace -- 8/18/2003, 2:13 pm- Re: Other: damage
Paul Probus -- 8/19/2003, 1:20 pm
- Re: Other: damage
- Re: Other: damage
C. Fronzek -- 8/16/2003, 3:44 pm- Re: Other: damage
yakman -- 8/16/2003, 4:49 pm- Re: Other: damage
Brian Nystrom -- 8/19/2003, 12:57 pm- Re: Other: damage, in more ways than one
Mike Hanks -- 8/16/2003, 6:15 pm- Re: Other: damage, in more ways than one
jimkozel -- 8/17/2003, 11:19 am- Re: Other: damage, in more ways than one
Tom Yost -- 8/18/2003, 2:56 pm- Re: WELL SAID, Jim! *NM*
Steve Frederick -- 8/17/2003, 6:05 pm- Re: Other: damage, in more ways than one
yakman -- 8/17/2003, 2:30 pm- Re: Anonymity and hostility
Shawn Baker -- 8/17/2003, 11:42 pm- Well said, Shawn *NM*
Brian Nystrom -- 8/19/2003, 12:49 pm
- Re: Other: damage, in more ways than one
Rehd -- 8/17/2003, 3:47 pm - Well said, Shawn *NM*
- I'm With you, Jim-IDENTIFY Or take a HIKE *NM*
Charles Leach -- 8/17/2003, 1:42 pm- dito! *NM*
Danny -- 8/17/2003, 12:55 pm- Exactly *NM*
Ted Henry -- 8/17/2003, 12:34 pm - Re: WELL SAID, Jim! *NM*
- Re: Other: damage, in more ways than one
- Re: Other: damage, in more ways than one
- Re: Other: damage
- Re: Other: damage
- Re: Other: Engineering analysis *LINK*
Brad Farr -- 8/16/2003, 12:21 am- Re: Other: damage *LINK*
Glen Smith -- 8/15/2003, 4:54 pm- Re: Other: damage
Ryan -- 8/15/2003, 6:31 pm- Re: Other: damage
Paul G. Jacobson -- 8/15/2003, 9:37 pm
- Re: Other: damage
- Re: Other: damage
Bill Price -- 8/15/2003, 3:49 pm - Re: Other: damage
- Re: Other: damage