ricwoz

Members
  • Content Count

    57
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

About ricwoz

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Vancouver, WA on the Columbia River

Recent Profile Visitors

631 profile views
  1. ricwoz

    Jules Verne Trophy attempts 2020

    ooops! here is the link. The history of the boat name is pretty interesting, as is the boat itself. It's the first foiler to attempt the record. The Jules Verne Trophy has had two phases: the era of the giant cats which ended around 2010, and since then the trimarans have been the contenders. And now we may be on the verge of the age of foils. http://www.gitana-team.com/en/
  2. The Gitana 17 team is holding (beginning Nov 1) waiting for the weather report they like to set sail in their record attempt. Their web site has a countdown clock on it, and will be the place to monitor the attempt once it is underway. Anyone else keeping an eye on this?
  3. ricwoz

    MOD 70 vs. ORMA 60 - what's next?

    I subscribed to Multihulls Magazine for 10 years, so I remember the occasional proa showing up in there. I think Dick Newick designed one that someone built. The only one I have any familiarity with is the Hawaiian outrigger canoe. And that's mostly from watching the Hawaii Five Oh opening sequence. When they sail outrigger canoes the keep the ama (which is heavy, I know from messing around with the on the beach) always to leeward? And when they paddle it's always on the left (port)?
  4. ricwoz

    MOD 70 vs. ORMA 60 - what's next?

    I'm not sure the sail area comparisons in my little chart above are apples to apples. On some of the other articles about maxi-cats they list upwind and downwind sail area, when neither is specified one wonders which it is. Mast height is a decent proxy. It sees like the shorter (LOA) and wider tris are faster than then cats which have the same size mast. That's a rough generalization. Maybe their are material issues, but it seems like a 100' cat with a 75 or larger beam would be more competitive with the trimarans.
  5. ricwoz

    MOD 70 vs. ORMA 60 - what's next?

    Gitana 17 is awesome, and basically is using the same architecture as IDEC Sport, but adding foils. What an amazing machine. They are currently on standby for their round-the-world record attempt, waiting for the right weather to set sail. It's impressive that they seem to have a very small crew: only 5. So, while we are waiting for the first full foiling record, it's interesting to look back at all the progress made against this record in the last 30 years. The baton was passed from the cats to the tris in 2010. From 1993 to 2010 six boats held the record, five catamarans and only one triarman. (The last of the group was Orange II, which was dimensionally very similar to Playstation: 121' long, 60' wide. Since 2010 three boats have held the record, all of them are tris. What changed? Clearly materials have changed. A huge difference between Playstation and IDEC is weight. 27 for the cat, 18 for the tri.
  6. ricwoz

    MOD 70 vs. ORMA 60 - what's next?

    Here is IDEC Sport, the current record-holder for crewed circumnavigation. (she's had a bunch of names). So has Playstation, and she was named Cheyenne when she set the 'round-the-world record. A comparison of two champion record setting boats - 15 years apart: Length Beam Displacement Mast Height Sail Area Crew Record Date IDEC 103' 74' 18 long tons 131' 8,910 sq ft 10 40d 23h 30m 2017 - Jan Playstation 124' 60' 27 long tons 135' 11,150 sq ft 12 58d 09h 32m 2004 - Apr
  7. ricwoz

    MOD 70 vs. ORMA 60 - what's next?

    Besides increasing the length and decreasing the beam on the MOD 70s they also decreased the sail area, decreased the length of the mast, and moved the mast further aft on the hull (per my quote from their website in OP). This is from 2013, and it's really awesome to see the entire fleet in a couple of the shots here.
  8. ricwoz

    MOD 70 vs. ORMA 60 - what's next?

    Thanks for this detailed answer. I'm really interested in this. Your use of the term "over-square" seems to suggest that there is an optimum ratio of length to beam for tris, and it's less than 1:1. I don't understand why an "over-square" tri would be more likely to pitchpole. Aren't the shape of the bows, the buoyancy of the bows and the front-to-rear weight (balance) of the boat the things that designers tweak to counter tendency to capsize? I get that making the bows longer helps prevent capsize. As I recall from the mega-cat era Playstation added 20 feet to the bows to fight pitchpoling prior to her circumnavigation record setting run. Is perhaps the real problem that the extra beam gives the ability to overpower and not capsize, but then extra length is needed to prevent capsize? Would that make the "ideal" ratio the one where the risk of capsize and the risk of pitchpole are equalized? Wikipedia:
  9. The "Pure Multihull Porn from the mythic front page" thread and videoos were excellent and got me thinking about the evolution of these big boat classes The ORMA (Ocean Racing Multihiull Association) was a official racing rule propagated by the ISAF (now "World Sail") in 1996 and active until 2007. So, sort of like an oversized Formula 18. The MOD 70 (Multihull One Design) was created in 2009, and claimed to serve as the successor. These were already a very different thing (Development Rule class vs. One Design class). How successful were they? According to Wikipedia the class: MOD 70 said there was a "strict quota" of 12 boats, and seven were built. Looking at the site it doesn't seem like the whole series racing idea ever really took off. According to there web site 5 boats raced in 2012, and since then it looks like individual boats have entered a few races under open rules. The One Design series racing thing never really took off, I don't know how any ORMA 60's were built, but it seems more than 7 - which seems to be the most claimed by Mod 70. So, despite the supposed danger of the 60's it seems like it was the more successful class. MOD 70 claims these design advancements: SECURITY – RELIABILITY – PERFORMANCE 1) Smaller sail area (5%) providing more safety when ocean sailing 2 2) Longer central hull (10 ft) to minimise pitchpoling 3 3) Raised beam clearance to reduce wave impacts 4 4) Possibility to lift the centre hull rudder 5) Curved foils for more performance and safety 6 6) Shorter monolithic canting mast (+/- 8%) positioned further aft in the hull 7 7) Low temperature cured carbon fibre & foam sandwich construction So is the 70 the better boat, as the designers claim? Obviously "bigger is faster", but the 60's had the longer mast. There was no requirement in ORMA that all three hulls on the ORMA boats be the same length - if "long in the middle" were faster anyone could have built one that way. (And in fact ORMA permitted cats as well as tris, I believe) Obviously raised beams, curved boards, lifting rudders make sense. Some later ORMA boats had some of these features, and I don't believe the rules prohibited any of them. The beam on the shorter ORMA was wider than that on the longer MOD 70. From the MOD 70 site: Measuring over 10 feet in length (21.20 metres instead of 18.28 metres), the MOD 70s are less beamy than their ORMA ancestors, the latter reaching 18 metres.; :But- ORMA had a max beam, and most builders took advantage of it, but it wasn't required to build to the max permitted. A 60x40' boat was rule legal. Is there some new consensus on ideal beam for a trimaran now? So, which was the better boat? The formula 60s seemed to result in a bigger field. And the boats (the newest being over a decade old at this point) are still winning in head-to-head races against the supposedly superior MOD 70 and setting point-to-point records, like Mighty Merlot. The supposed danger of the ORMA 60s seems based on one race, which was a tough race. It was a long single-handed race. It's may be easier to gut extreme weather out without worrying about capsize, so naturally most of the big multihull competitors chose to "abandon" as the French site on the race says. So did 5 of 17 sixty-foot monohulls, though. I don't know how many of the boats actually capsized or were destroyed in the race, perhaps a couple. Was the MOD 70 a detour that has turned into a dead-end for ocean going multis? Should the ORMA rule be revived, modified or replaced with a new rule that allows multiple builders and new innovation into this space? Isn't a development class for multis of this size and cost inherently more interesting, and doesn't history prove that at this point? Clearly we had not hit the apex of multihull design in 2009, where we pretty much knew everything interesting about how to build an ocean going multi. (Which one would be hard pressed to even claim for a more traditional monohull ocean racing category today). ORMA 60 shot by Tim Feak Photography. Notes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORMA_60 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOD_70 http://www.multionedesign.com/en/ https://www.sailingworld.com/sailboats/mod-squad/
  10. So, I'm introducing a fun topic to hold us over through the virus. What blue water boats do you favor for world cruising. A small crew, 2 to 4 or 5 people tops. I grew up lusting after boats like Pacific Seacraft, Valiant yachts, Hans Christians and that sort. But now we have X-yachts, Hallberg-Rassy, and more modern performance cruisers. So, while we wait out the plague, what's your fantasy 40-50 foot blue water yacht? Pictures encouraged!
  11. ricwoz

    bluewater multihulls

    This thread needs more pictures! Here is the Antrim 40' tri. Aotea - a 40' trimaran for shorthanded ocean racing I grabbed these pics from Antrim Associates web page. Lovely boat. Anyone know what Peter Hogg is up to these days? These boats were built to smash records. They sound pretty Spartan: ACCOMODATION Private double berth with limited headroom located under cockpit. Berth access is from main cabin to starboard with optional hinged companionway steps for increased access. Wet seat and wet locker conveniently located by companionway. To port is the galley, settee, toilet, sink and shower with seats and a single berth conversion to starboard. The forward double berth is accessed to starboard of the daggerboard trunk. She features zippered padded doors for reduced weight and noise.
  12. ricwoz

    bluewater multihulls

    Thanks for all the thoughtful replies so far. Lots of good information here, I really appreciate the responses from everyone. Boardhead, I'd love to see some pictures of your custom trimarans!
  13. ricwoz

    bluewater multihulls

    VS. I'm interested if even the denizens of this board, the multihull one, are sometimes still partial to monos for certain applications. Specifically longer short-handed blue water voyages. If you were given the choice between, for instance, a production cruising oriented multihull (like a Dragonfly) vs. a similar sized monohull in the popular 33-40 foot length (insert your favorite lead sled here) would you consider the tri a better choice for things like crossing oceans, given that you might be doing it with a small crew, or even single-handed? I'm not asking this over in the "sailing general" forum, because I know a lot of monohull guys are just hating on mutis, and consider them unstable racing-only platforms. I'm not in that class, in fact for a long time I probably considered multihulls better for almost everything. But now, when I'm thinking about it more, it seems like mono lends itself to short handed passagemaking. On a mono, if you have self steering on and you are unaware of the wind coming up you might suffer a knockdown. In a multihull the same scenario might find you turtled. It seems like multis are just less forgiving of 'set it and forget it" sailing. Now I will admit: all my multihull sailing has been on small boats: from Hobie cats to Corsair F-28s, with a few big charter cat rides thrown in for good measure. Where as the few ocean crossings and even long Great Lakes trips I've done have all been on monohulls. For instance, take the typical "couple sailing to Japan by way of Hawaii" as a scenario. Would you feel safer in a nice blue-water mono, or a similar trimaran. I don't even mention cats, most of them look to be set up for "coastal cruising", and while I'm sure people have done ocean crossings successfully, most of them don't look like that's what they are really designed for. (Except Gunboats look pretty serious.) On the other hand healing sucks, getting tossed out of your bunk is not fun. Just curious what others here think!
  14. ricwoz

    What defines a true circumnavigation?

    Thanks for posting this. I've never heard of any of this before. The clipper ship thing is interesting, but it seems to leave a lot of places that were major trade centers off. I guess you have wool in New Zealand, but I've always hear of places like India and China and even Indonesia as the main trading centers of Asia in that era, no offense to Aussie and Kiwis intended. Why were the Clipper ships furiously sailing far south to rocket around the bottom of the Earth in the Roaring 40s and then return to Western Europe for? Possibly a better question: what are some good books on the Clipper ships? I've always heard of them, but it's a hole in my knowledge of history I'd like to plug. What are the Five Oceans? Atlantic, Pacific, Indian ... and... Thanks much, nice post with the two maps!
  15. ricwoz

    What defines a true circumnavigation?

    Yes, that's what I meant. Thank you for the clarification.