John J. Crow. Error in plans for Birdham Cutter purchased from Laurent Giles in 1987. Corrected drawing included a warning that these drawings should be used as a guide only, while the construction method instructions state that the plates should be trimmed to suit true shape lofting leaving only a small tolerance for trimming back. Other problems encountered were – the hull builder found it impossible to construct the forward end of the keel to the off sets or the keel plan - when launched the boat floated quite high in the bow and down by the stern. This has required the addition of several hundred kilos of ballast to be added well forward to bring the boat to a reasonably level state. The rudder, built to the plan, would not turn more than a few degrees without fouling the hull and had to have the top reshaped to operate effectively. The plans generally lacked detail eg. No mention of fuel tanks, batteries, plumbing, wiring, chain lockers, centre board-lifting devices, also some rigging deficiencies. Once these problems were overcome the boat while a little down on her marks performs reasonably well. I was fairly disappointed in the quality of the plans as they lacked much of the detail I expected to find on plans provided by designers of such high repute. J.J.CROW.

“J Michael Davidson” Dear Mr. Barry van Geffen, The plans package has arrived here late on Friday after noon. I would like to take the time here to inform you of just how disappointed I am with the quality of the over all package. I do not understand just how you expect one to replicate a vessel to the exact proportions with plans that include three different vessels. I think that I clearly stated that I was interested in the ORIGINAL design and that any other changes would be included for completing information to build a yacht. I feel we are missing a number of things concerning the ORIGINAL and the package is grossly short of information. Just which set of plans did Mr.Pinckney use? It seems there was at one time a change to accommodate a larger engine than the 10-17 Albin gas engine that was originally installed. And that was installed on the quarter with a folding blade prop. As I mention before I have done extensive research on this design and may be able to add to your knowledge concerning certain facts. I would be glad to relate them if you were at all interested. Spec’s for castings or fabrications for the rudder gudgeons and shoe are not included with these drawings. Am I supposed to guess??? Or just design my own. Out of 28 sections there are only two section drawings available. How does one reproduce the interior layout without these? There are drawings with section 21&22 shown but they are for the newer engine design, which I will not be using. The fold down into the cabin sole, table drawing that was original evidently does not exist?? I have a book showing it in a drawing. Can you explain???? What about dimensions and placement tankage, not one mention of these. Another guess? Or do you not think it is important where these are placed? What about trim? Or do we just keep on hand an unlimited amount of lead for interior trim ballast. I asked for the spec’s concerning the system that Mr. Pinckney used concerning the grove in the mast for the top sail. Was that an afterthought? It seems what we have here is an incomplete set of drawings made up to represent a full set of plans. Pretty poor I must say. I think I have been clear about my intentions on this matter of reproducing the ORIGINAL vessel and if that is not possible fine. I have paid in good faith for sets of plans that I feel are an embarrassment to take to a builder and expect him to use. You have been concerned about the integrity and quality that goes into this building project and then turn out a bunch of pieced together scrap paper for one to work with. You did not even care to take Mr.Tobins name off the specification pamphlet No.584. Did I pay less for these or do I just not get the same treatment. By some luck the plans were sent to the right address but on each plans sheet my name with initials have been wrongly produced. Is this the best you can do for attention to detail? I have tried to be professional concerning this matter in ordering a usable set of plans and feel I have been taken advantage of. Can you please explain just what is the problem here or am I expecting way too much for a $500,000 to $750,000 project. As you might guess I am very upset over this matter. There are certain unique things that make this vessel special and most have been omitted. Why was I not informed at the very beginning of our communication that the details of the ORIGINAL Pinckney “Dyarchy” were no longer available? J. MICHAEL DAVIDSON.