Aristotle

I buy cheap brushes as well but just put them in a jar of raw linseed oil to stop any drying out at the end of a varnishing session. When you're ready to start again just squeeze out the excess oil and the brush is as if you had just finished the last session. I've got two brushes that I've been using like this since May last year and even though they are really cheap brushes there is no sign that they will need to be binned any time soon. Much better than cleaning after use - however well you think you've cleaned a brush there always seems to be specks of dried varnish hiding deep in the bristles!

Apparently the secret to good varnishing is keeping your brushes in linseed oil. Is this something everybody else has always known? If it is then

Sorry - I thought BNP was (is) a french bank ......

I think I probably sailed on Pan - I certainly remember Sparklet - she was too much of a thoroughbred for the likes of cabin boys like me! The yacht I remember best was called Stella which I think is probably Stella Genesta.

Thanks Socrates - that would be great - I'll PM you when I next expect to be in the area. I think I might know Pan - was she ever part of the Green Wyvern fleet?

To misquote Samuel Pepys: And so to planking. Don’t talk to me about planking! There seem to be various rules of thumb regarding how joints between planks should be spaced, for instance, at least 4 feet and two planks apart i.e. if there is less than 4 feet horizontally between joints there needs to be at least two un-joined planks in between (I think this is the Lloyd’s List specification for wooden yachts), 3 feet and 3 planks apart (the specification of our retired boat builder neighbour) etc. It is important to understand the principles behind these guidelines, but generally I’m with Harry Day and his view that rules are “for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools”, so for small vessels, and those restricted to the relatively benign conditions of inland waters, there can probably be some flexibility in the way these “rules” are applied. Brian and Joy provided invoices from 1999 to 2015 which gave full details of all the maintenance work done during that period. Being someone who likes to gain understanding by analysing the data, I decided to take a closer look at the detail of the repairs done since 1999. The results were interesting! On the starboard side there had been 18 pieces of new planking (a total length of about 120ft) with an average length of 6’ 8”. The port side had 25 new pieces of planking (a total length of about 136ft) with an average length of just less than 5’ 6”. Of course averages only tell part of the story: Over 70% of the port side planks were less than 6ft in length. 50% of the starboard planks were 6ft or less. I haven’t done any calculations but keeping to the rules of thumb with this number of short planks would be difficult if not impossible. Certainly, visual inspection showed that there were places where joints on adjacent planks were as little as 12” apart. As someone commented – it’s a bit like having a zip fastener down the side of the boat. It was clear that there was planking that would need to be replaced to ensure the stiffness and stability of the hull even if the planks didn’t have any serious rot. Nearly all the old repairs had been butt jointed with reinforcing “bibles” (nearly enough to open a religious bookshop) which is not necessarily a problem if done properly but isn’t aesthetically pleasing. There were also quite a lot of short “splints” supporting areas of the planking. The other feature of the historic maintenance was the number of repairs to plank edges: 9 on the port side, 15 on the starboard, in total about 60ft of edge repairs. The photo below shows a cross section of a plank with repaired “edges”. The risk with repairs taken to extremes like this is that when the plank takes up, it won’t swell evenly, or consistently with the surrounding planks, which introduces additional stresses into the hull. Not serious in isolation but if there are too many repairs like this combined with a lot of short lengths of planking, it all starts to undermine the stiffness and stability of the hull’s structure. This is particularly important in a yacht where all sorts of stresses are resolved through the hull while sailing. The boat builder who maintained Kenmure for Brian and Joy had also done at least some of her maintenance prior to their ownership so the record based on his invoices from 1999 may not give the full story. Taking into account rot and the excess of short planks and edge repairs, the only sensible conclusion was that a significant amount of re-planking was required! The photo below illustrates a lot of what I have described: this is a view of the starboard side of the main cabin looking aft – it shows bibles, splints, repaired edges and the condition of the bilge paint. It also shows the spacing of the frames and ribs, with one bent rib between each pair of sawn frames (or vice versa depending on your point of view). It is not really visible in this photo but there was also a problem with the beam below the bulkhead at the far end of the photo. This is the bulkhead between the main cabin and the well. For some reason, the limber hole on the port side of this beam was drilled through the wood rather than being formed by a notch in the bottom edge (as is the case everywhere else and on the starboard side of this beam). This had prevented proper drainage of bilge water and the resultant rot in the beam is evident in the close-up picture below. Next instalment: Stripping out and the Baby Blake.

Oh dear - this raises all kinds of philosophical questions (as I'm sure you realised when you said it ): How good is your eye sight ? Quite how "awful" is the face you're looking at ? Given that you are looking at a mirror image of yourself you are, by definition, looking at a distorted version of reality anyway! As humans, we are very aware that we change over time (we like to call it becoming mature), there are animal species whose life cycle involves metamorphosis which is much more dramatic change, embryos develop, eggs hatch, rocks weather, cheese ripens etc. The idea that things remain unchanged throughout their lifetime is a fallacy. Unchanging stability is something we are capable of imagining but probably never happens in reality. At least, that is one point of view .... So perhaps we should accept that change is inevitable and that restoration is just part of the "maturing" process.

I've had permission from Bev at Topsail to use the photos I was referring to above.

Having caused a bit of a diversion, I think I ought to navigate us back on course . On the subject of tar varnish, I contacted several well experienced yards/boat builders while casting around for someone to take on Kenmure as a project. A the time, tar varnish was new to me and i asked naive questions on the assumption that it was some kind of archaic anti-fouling. At least two of the people I spoke to stressed that tar varnish was principally for waterproofing, any anti-fouling properties are incidental. They are doing different things thus tar varnish isn't an alternative for anti-fouling just as anti-fouling isn't an alternative to tar varnish. I can only report this view - I don't have enough experience to comment personally! I've also have the following information on the subject which is interesting: If tar varnish is painted straight from the tin it is very thick, however, if you cut it with real creosote to the consistency of honey, it can be applied with a roller. During the planking process each plank was dowsed with at least 6 coats of a mixture of clear wood preservative and linseed oil. The first coat (possibly 2) of tar varnish was applied as a primer, thinned to a consistency of soup, to what were essentially bare planks. Thereafter the "honey" coats. The benefit of this is you do not build up a thick tar layer; the paint becomes semi-sacrificial and at the end of the season the upper powdery surface (when dry) can be brushed off for the next application. The preservatives within it do however leach into the timber - possibly more readily. True tar varnish is coal based (as is creosote), and both can still readily be obtained at specialist outlets - despite the fallacy that it is "banned"; it never has been, merely restricted to professional or industrial users. This is not usually a barrier. The entire boat was re-planked and tar varnish was used on the bottom. After 6-7 coats and 2 seasons, after haul out and brushing, the grain of the planking is still clearly visible - no heavy build-up at all. The lasting benefit of tar varnish was brought home when the 3 or 4 remaining original plank ends were removed during the rebuild. These 110 year old planks were infused with tar-like stain their whole thickness and no rot.

Chilli peppers - what a good idea! The day before yesterday I was sent by Mrs Aristotle to the local village supermarket to buy (amongst other things) an ordinary red pepper to go in our vegetable stir fry. They didn't have any but they did have some nice looking small red peppers that were labelled "piment antillais" (). I bought half a dozen because they weren't expensive and it was all they had - big big mistake! Mrs Aristotle, who is normally very trusting, felt slightly cautious and thought it would be wise to have a taste before slicing them all to go in the stir fry. "Here, you try" she said (having turned a rather strange colour not unlike a red pepper). So I did - second big mistake of the day - ! Apparently piment antillais are also known as Habaneros. On the Scoville scale of chilli spicyness they score between 100,000 and 350,000, which is the same as a Scotch Bonnet chilli. To put this in perspective, an ordinary red pepper scores between 0 and 100, a Jalapeño between 1,000 and 10,000 . Let me tell you - there is nothing eco-friendly about these things ! But if anyone wants to try, we still have 5 3/4 piments antillais in our freezer .

As Polly commented in a different thread, Kenmure looked in quite good condition before work started! Once in the shed at Cox’s it was time to get a proper assessment of the work to be done. This was approached with a few principles in mind: Firstly, although I am of an age where I only have a few years sailing left in me, it was important to extend Kenmure’s life for as long as possible. Consequently the scope of work needed to cover anything that required immediate attention and anything else that was likely to need to be done in the next 5 years. It seemed pointless to have some planks replaced only to have more done in a few years’ time. Secondly, it was important not to put a time constraint on getting the work completed, partly because this could lead to compromises when it came to making decisions about what to do and how to do it. It also made it easier for Cox’s to schedule other work that was higher priority (like getting other people’s boats back in the water) and hence give full attention to Kenmure when they had time. Having no definite timescale also meant that there was less of a problem when anything unanticipated came to light! What a good decision this proved to be! Thirdly, the aim was to keep Kenmure as faithful as possible to her original design (ref my comments about Aristotle’s four causes in Polly’s “Brilliant” thread) but making small changes where these seemed sensible. So for instance, the suggestion of replacing the rudder with a more hydrodynamic modern design was rejected, whereas the fitting of additional oak ribs seemed prudent. So a scope of work was agreed. This included fitting additional ribs, replacing the keel (of which more later) replacing all rotten planks, frames and any other parts of the hull which needed attention (of which more later) and reinstating the cove line which had mostly disappeared when during previous repairs to the sheer strake. The keel. One of the authentic features of Kenmure when we bought her was that she had been regularly tar varnished below the waterline. This impermeable layer is a good thing as long as the structure of the hull is fairly watertight, however if the hull tends to take on water (perhaps through seams that aren’t adequately caulked) and if the bilge paint isn’t well maintained, having a semi-permeable layer inside the hull and an impermeable layer on the outside isn’t such a good thing! What keeps water out will also keep it in. Of course the matter of whether or not to paint bilges or leave them so the wood can “breathe” has been the subject of debate for a long time. There is probably no “right” answer – it depends on individual circumstances – but one thing that I think is true: If the bilges are painted, this needs to be kept in as good condition as the external paint. Obviously water will drain to the lowest point, so if you are a yacht with a wooden keel you need to give very careful consideration to how the bilges are maintained because the holes for the keel bolts can form natural drainage channels down into the body of the keel. Whether or not to paint bilges Is a difficult balance: I expect Timbo will confirm from the archaeological record, comparing the preservation of organic material from the majority of archaeological sites with arid areas such as the Valley of the Kings in Egypt or waterlogged places like the Somerset wetlands and Must Farm, the rule of thumb is dry timber = good, wet (i.e. completely immersed) timber = good, damp timber = bad. So do you try and keep the hull dry by painting the bilges, or encourage it to dry out by not painting or accept that dampness is inevitable and find a (chemical) way to reduce the rot. A big apology if this is teaching grandparents to suck eggs. MorrisMynah – please feel free to make a “you're talking a load of rot” joke – oh sorry, I’ve just spoiled the punch line – what a rotten thing to do, sorry! The efficacy of tar varnish was demonstrated when Eric stuck a penknife through the tar varnish on the keel and produced a rivulet of water which ran down the keel and formed a puddle on the floor. Kenmure had been out of the water for at least a month at this point so it doesn’t take much imagination to work out the cause of the soft spots in the keel timbers! There had been repairs to the keel deadwoods in 2005 and 2007. There were also 2 pieces of wood let into the keel in 2005 but no clue about the size or location of these. The keel bolts had been replaced in 2007 and were in good condition but it is possible that some of the keel timbers were original; they were certainly in a very poor state. Fortunately the hog was still in good condition. The new keel was made up and fitted. The old keel had been slightly off-centre – this may have been related to the addition (in 2005) of a “wedge section of oak fitted and epoxied to the underside of the hog to make the keel hang vertically”! This “feature” was corrected when the new keel was fitted. Ribs and frames The Press brother’s practice seems to have been to alternate sawn frames and bent oak ribs, perhaps the thinking was that a sawn frame was stiffer than a thin bent rib so with oak frames the number of ribs could be safely reduced. Possibly it was a quicker and cheaper method of construction, particularly when spaced widely apart. Kenmure was ordered at the beginning of November 1925 and launched in early March 1926 – someone may be able to suggest whether this is a typical length of time to build a 28’ river cruiser but it sounds quite quick to me (particularly since it is thought that Zephyr I was being built at about the same time). The photo below is a detail from the after end of Pearl – Kenmure’s twin sister. Pearl was part of the Press hire fleet, which shows that the construction method of alternating frames and ribs seems to have been normal practice, not just a way of speeding up the delivery of privately commissioned boats. This picture also gives a clear idea of the spacing between the frames and ribs. Interestingly, Morning Calm, the other Press yacht owned by Captain Donaldson for a short period does not use this method of construction. She is currently for sale on the Topsail Yacht Brokers site. Photographs of the forepeak show only bent oak ribs and the evenness of the fixings on pictures of the outside of the hull suggest that this is probably the case throughout. The Topsail site states that she was built in 1920, so perhaps they changed their method of construction at some time between 1920 and 1924? As a result of the frame and rib style of construction, it was decided that the stiffness of the hull would benefit from installing additional oak ribs. Chris, who has done most of the work, says the improvement was tangible even before he started on the planking. Coming next - Planking, don't talk to me about planking .......

The 1965 Blakes brochure lists 9 boats in the Broadland Swan class (which includes Broadland Grebe). It also lists Broadland Falcon and Broadland Kingfisher and Broadland Heron so there seems to be some confusion in the account of movement between boatyards and renaming! Broadland Curlew is not listed at all which probably ccounts for the difference between the 10 that were built and the 9 in the Blakes catalogue. Maidencraft weren't a Blakes boatyard so I have no idea whether she was in their fleet.

Fascinating I had no idea about the Christopher Cockrell connection. In my youth I used to spend hours poring over the Blakes catalogue waiting for the next Broads holiday and I've always liked the design of the old Ripplecraft cruisers but never realised their pedigree.

Well yes, as a philosopher I have to say that is one point of view .

Oh dear - what have I said now . On reflection though, Socrates is probably referring to the four causes from Aristotle's Physics Book 2 section 3 : This suggests that if the design, methods and skills, and purpose remains the same, it is still the same object even if you change the wood - I'm going to say that I have complete belief in this for the following reason: I have the utmost admiration for Polly and her tenacity in sourcing good quality larch for the work on Brilliant. I have to come clean that (mainly because of the difficulty in finding quality larch) Kenmure's new planking is mahogany . Oops - have I just made a confession to defend the real Aristotle when Socrates was actually referring to something that I said ?

Thank you for all your likes but before I post the next instalment it would be nice to have some feedback on whether the pace of the narrative is too fast, too slow, too much detail, not enough detail etc etc.. In the event of no feedback, I'll just carry on ...... and on ..... and on .......

We bought Kenmure in March 2016. The first task was to move her from Wayford where she had been laid up over the winter to Barton Turf where the work was going to be done. We knew that she was “a bit leaky”! Brian and Joy were very open about this in a phone conversation before we had even seen her. There was a lot of daylight visible between many of the planks and the survey had identified rot in several places below the waterline. There was also a tell-tale bag of sawdust in the forepeak! The application of sawdust had been a regular feature of the annual re-launch for a number of years apparently! Part of the kit included in the sale was a small aluminium pan on a broom handle used to administer the sawdust below the waterline! On the advice of Eric from Cox’s we decided to prime and then caulk all of the worst gaps to make her as watertight as possible before she went back into the water for the short trip down the Ant. Mrs Aristotle (Pythias - the daugter of King Hermias ) and I spent a morning identifying and marking with chalk on the outside, all the seams where daylight was visible from inside. Each of these was then primed with Seajet primer and then sealed with linseed oil putty. As it happened we missed a couple that were difficult to see from the inside and not obvious on the outside! To start the process of taking up, we threw buckets of water into the bilges, sprayed other exposed areas of the hull with water and laid wet towels everywhere we could. The next photo shows that we failed to deal with at least one wide seam – you can see the water pouring through from the bilge like a cloudburst! You can also see a pad of wood attached to the outside of the hull. I am familiar with the use of “bibles” on the inside of a hull to support butt joints between planks where the joint doesn’t coincide with a frame, but I never managed to identify the reason behind this unusual external feature. More discussion of bibles and planking joints a bit later. Kenmure went back into the water the following day (15 April) and was left in the slings to start taking up. The electric bilge pump was operating continuously at full capacity dealing with several fountains of water. However, by the following morning, there was little water entering the hull, the bilge pump operating intermittently for a minute or so every half hour. By Sunday she was out of the slings ready for the short trip down river the following day. The trip to Barton was uneventful. In fact she was so water-tight by now that we took a trip round the broad while we ate our sandwiches in the knowledge that it would be some time before we would back on the water again ! She was left safely moored up at Cox’s waiting to be lifted out again! You’ll notice that the title of this thread is “Kenmure The Continuing Restoration”. Full credit for the start of the restoration process must again go to the previous owners, Brian and Joy, who did a huge amount of work to start returning Kenmure to her original configuration. The work they did included: · Reinstalled electric lighting (which was an original feature – most yachts of the 1920s would have been lit with oil lamps) · Stripped all paintwork and varnish in the cabins and re-varnished throughout (a lot of the interior woodwork had been painted white – probably when she was in one of the hire fleets) · Re-fitted the well with new lockers · Removed the bowsprit (which was not original and was added sometime after 1974); · Re-instated cross-trees which had been removed (again probably when she was in hire. Pictures from 1974 posted by “laughinggravy” on the other forum show her without crosstrees and without a bowsprit. I haven’t reposted the pictures here as I am not sure of any potential copyright issues!); · Re-instated the self-tacking jib; · Replaced internal cabin doors; · Re-instated the hatch in the stern deck (which was a feature of many Press yachts) · Installed a Baby Blake toilet (although the original would probably have been one of the “flap” type toilets); · Returned her to the original name of “Kenmure” after a gap of 27 years Watch this space for the next instalment will deal with the work carried out at Cox's ........

OK - we might just manage something though - I have to leave about lunchtime on the 16th.

Sadly I won't be back in Norfolk until the beginning of May (to start re-fitting all the interior woodwork) but I'll be there for about 10 days if you're around.

Polly - Deja vu! A really interesting thread. Given that Brilliant is Kenmure's closest living relative it is fascinating but probably not surprising that we are going through very similar restorations. I've just been preparing the text for the next couple of posts on the Kenmure restoration and I think you'll find a lot of it very familiar! It would be great to get together once we're both back in the water - perhaps together with any other Press brothers yachts?

Just to put everything in perspective, I’d like to start with a brief history of Kenmure (apologies to those who already know all of this!). All the credit for our knowledge of Kenmure’s past must go to Brian and Joy (the previous owners) who did a huge amount of research on both Kenmure herself and her original owner, Capt. John Muir Donaldson MC (the MC was awarded for conspicuous gallantry on 15 July 1916 at High Wood during the Battle of the Somme). Capt. Donaldson ordered Kenmure from the Press brothers on 5th November 1925. Kenmure is identical to another Press yacht named Pearl, indeed the original sail plan for Kenmure (held by Jeckells) is labelled as Pearl 2. Pearl was part of the Press brothers hire fleet and one can only imagine that Donaldson probably hired Pearl at some time before placing the order although there is no surviving record of this. Search on "Kenmure AND Pearl" in the other forum to see what has become of Pearl. Kenmure was launched in early March 1926. Her registration fee was 2/6 (that’s 12.5p for anyone not familiar with old money)! The toll was £1 per annum and insurance with Commercial Union £7 per annum. Her maiden voyage was from Wroxham to Ranworth on 24th April 1926 – C&G Press then charged 10 shillings to bring her back to Wroxham from Ranworth on April 26th 1926! Pun alert! Capt. Donaldson was a leading light in the electricity generating and distribution industry. He was President of the IEE 1931-32. There is a short video of him on Youtube (search on "Donaldson 1949"). Kenmure is thought to have been the first yacht on the Broads to have an electric inboard motor, probably installed as early as 1928. Donaldson also owned another Press yacht Morning Calm from 1939 to just after the end of WW2. The last recorded voyage under Capt. Donaldson’s ownership was on Monday 25th May 1953 from Barton to Wroxham. By 1954 she had been sold to Trumans where she was used as the family boat before going into hire with Trumans and then with Eastwood Whelpton (under the name Wind Lass). She subsequently went back into private ownership before being bought by Brian and Joy in March 1977. We bought her in March 2016 which marks the beginning of Kenmure’s story under our stewardship! Watch this space for the next instalment ……..

Thank you all for such a (huge) welcome - I am overwhelmed (and that doesn't happen very often!). I'd like to respond to one or two individuals: MorrisMynah: That's my kind of humour - Oh dear, is that the quiet sound of sinking hearts in the rest of the forum Polly: I was aware of the close relationship between Brilliant and Kenmure - it would be great to meet up - there doesn't seem to be many Press brothers yachts left now. Kenmure has an "identical twin" which is the subject of a thread in the other place. Just search on "Kenmure AND Pearl". For the avoidance of confusion, the soubriquet "Kenmure" is Kenmure's previous owner, "Socrates" is me (hence my comment in my original post here!). The name Kenmure is interesting and is part of a number of strange coincidences that I will go into on the restoration thread. The previous owners did a lot of research into the history of Kenmure and her original owner, all of which they have passed on to me - I think it includes a photo of Kenmure and Brilliant sailing together! The photo at the start of this thread is before the start of the restoration! As will become apparent, the project (and the cost) has expanded hugely from the original plan - but no-one owns a classic boat, we only have temporary stewardship and have to use our best endeavours to keep them alive (at least that's what I keep telling myself ). BroadAmbition: The shed is Cox's at Barton Turf - proof, if proof were needed, that most of the restoration is being done professionally - I cannot claim to be doing anything other than very minor (i.e. unskilled) bits myself. I think Cox's have done work on Brilliant in the past as well!

Just wanted to say hello to everyone - just joined today! Aristotle is my alter-ego, my real identity being Socrates but there appears to already be someone on the forum using this id . Once I've read the guidelines and understand the protocols I'm hoping to post news of the extensive restoration project that should see the 1926 Press Brothers yacht Kenmure back in the water later this year....... watch this space!