• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

14 Whiner

About harryproa

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

5,798 profile views
  1. Caribbean 600

    Does this mean the facts are known but can't be shared? If so, why not? Monkey, Great idea if you only want to know what has already happened. Not so good if you want to discuss ideas and contribute to what might be possible. Or I could do what everyone else does and post ideas and suppositions as facts. Russ and Ryan, Like I said, the uncapsizable was in relation to the sheet dumping device. I also apologised for writing something that someone wanting to undermine me might misinterpret. For what it is worth, used properly, the sheet dump device i described would make the boat uncapsizable in normal use. If you disagree with this, please explain why so I can alter it before installing it. Nothing about how wrong Russ was re: the ease of building masts, their costs or the other advantages of unstayed masts? A wider staying base reduces the loads a little, not the potential for breakages. This may not seem logical to you and other multihull sailors, but it is reality. And as the Fujin story (actually DDW's interpretation of the Fujin story, we still have not heard from any one on board) showed, the "logic of every modern performance multihull" is not necessarily correct.
  2. Caribbean 600

    Seagul, (post 344) What I meant is the rig appears to be uncambered, which is not fast. You can cant an unstayed rig by moving the bottom of the mast. Needs a spherical deck bearing, but most big rigs have these anway. Not a lot more difficult than canting a stayed rig. Gerald, The capsize in NSW was actually Big Wave Rider (I think) in Hobart. Peculiar, given that the multihull that put him on the map (Cheers) had unstayed masts. Materials, build methods and understanding of what is involved have all progressed since the 70's. When I spoke to Dick about the unstayed mast we were putting in the prototype bimaran (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/marine/news/article.cfm?c_id=61&objectid=3198180) in 1998 he thought it (mast and boat) was a great idea and could not see any reasons why it wouldn't work. He was right, the mast worked a treat and the boat won the RINA Design Competition. We built that mast from prepreg in a steel mould. 6 atms pressure and 110C/250F. Materials and methods certainly have changed. Pretty sure Fujin and the Atlantic cats which capsized would not consider dumping the main a "small advantage" There are others: You are not relying on a whole lot of small pieces, any one of which can break and cause the mast to fall down. For example, the $10 piece of stainless in the rig that caused your boat to capsize. The rigging does not need constant tuning, checking, maintenance or replacement of fittings and stays. And you do not worry about it when the breeze gets up. The boat can be cheaper and lighter, with a lower cog and less windage. See Richard Wood's comment about being right 90% of the time vs 70% of the time for a stayed rig without expert trimming. The sails can be hoisted, reefed and lowered on any point of sail and the boat can be stopped while this is done. The masts can be bench tested, and if they pass, you can be confident they will not break in use. He's not. All the people who have built them think so too. As do the Kelsall owners who have built theirs, including a biplane rigged 70'ter (Cool Change). Have a look through www.harryproa.com, where there are photos of at least 2 x 66'ters, 3 x 50'ters and 2 x 40'ters with masts built by unqualified or home builders, plus a bunch of others I don't have pictures of. And many beams, booms and sundry tubes built the same way. None have broken, apart from my experimental sfforts . Many samples have been tested, and met specs. If you quote me, do so in context. Uncapsizable was referring to the sheet dump mechanism. Sorry if this was not clear. The masts on the 50'ters above weigh 120 kgs/264 lbs, of which 60 kgs is carbon at $30/kg ($1,800), 40 kgs is resin ($500) and 20 kgs is glass ($200). Plus a couple of hundred bucks of consumables (mdf, formica, vac bag). Near enough $3,000. That is a 17m/57' unstayed mast suitable for a 6 ton, 8m/26' wide cat which would also need a hundred bucks worth of carbon tow and resin to beef up the cabin top and the floor. Building stayed masts is harder than building unstayed (smaller moulds, more local reinforcing), but we have sold plans for a few of these as well. "Doing it right" is no more diffcult than any other part of boat building. You just need an open mind, an awareness of what is involved and a decent set of plans. DDW explained about the loads and I explained about how little material is required to resist them and why. Instead of incorrect generalisations, tell us where you think we are wrong. Your wider staying base logic is flawed. A wider staying base means smaller fittings, which are just as likely to break as bigger fittings on a narrow base. Or are you saying you use oversze fittings? The best way to ensure fittings don't break is to not have them,
  3. Caribbean 600

    Airwick. We intended to use a canting (and raking) rig on the Volvo Proa, particularly for lake sailing where a maximum length boom would have provided too much weather helm. I leave it to the pedants to decide whether this rig is stayed or not. Testing the canting is one of the things on the to do list for the foiling harry below. That is not very polite. It may not be a "fact" for your boat where you have to lower and raise rudders and jibs, and rely on leeway and subsequent drag from the daggerboard to rotate the boat, but I can assure you it works well on a boat where there is nothing to raise and lower and the rudders work as foils to rotate the boat. Happy to record some tracks/make a movie when i get some time. However, my boat is in pieces while I investigate foiling and this has been put on hold while I do some materials testing for the 24m sailing cargo/ferry which we will be building for Pacific islands use next year. http://harryproa.com/?cat=51 Christian, No, I am not on drugs. I have spent 20+ years developing proas, experimenting with every configuration I (and many other interested people) could come up with. The results are what I posted. I presume you could not come up with a scenario to support your contention that "proas would be a clusterfuck racing with conventional boats"?
  4. Caribbean 600

    No argument from Rob about the problem. But, as with everything on proas, there are solutions if you look outside the square. The biggest reduction in distance lost is from fore and aft rudders which steer together to alter course far quicker than stern hung rudders. If they are also bidirectional, (ie do not need to be rotated), the helm movement is minimal, about the same as required to tack a cat. "Slamming into reverse" is exactly what happens when a 1:1 sheet is dumped and the new one pulled on. The boat stops like it hit a wall, starts moving in the new direction and luffing (from the sail force as well as the rudders) immediately. There is no measurable loss of distance to leeward, assuming the rudders are oversize and there is no daggerboard to stall. Done properly, it is faster than a tack. The sail is not moving the boat for a split second, whereas on a tack, the sail is stalled or flapping for most of the manoeuver. Solo, I could shunt my 10m/33' proa with one directional rudders in about 10 seconds from sheet dump to full speed and on course on the new tack. With bidirectional rudders, crew and practice it would be way less. The higher speed potential of a proa more than offsets the small loss from shunting, particularly as the majority of non beach cat cats try to sail one tack beats as they lose so much time tacking. The bigger the headsail, the more they lose. It would certainly not be a worry on an ocean race. The fastest shunting rig is a kite. No boat tacks as fast as a properly set up kite boat shunts. There have been a few reversible sails which do it nearly as fast. Proas are at more of a disadvantage shunting downwind, which is slower than gybing. There are a number of solutions, including deployable brakes (I have tested this using a bucket with some success), crew movement (weight aft and inboard to lift the ww hull and the lw hull bow) and sheeting on the front sail before the aft sail on a schooner to speed the turn. I am pretty sure that if some keen racers looked at it, downwind shunts would speed up a lot. Shunting is not "inefficient". The ability to sail in either direction is useful at the race start and in some crowded scenarios. And it is by far the quickest and most direct way to a man overboard. Christian, What specific rules are you referring to? Please describe a situation where a shunting boat vs a tacking boat would be a clusterfuck, or that the rules as written would not establish who has rights.
  5. Caribbean 600

    There are a few misconseptions here. Richard Woods actually wrote about the Aero Rig: Easy sailing: The sails are always working correctly, whatever point of sail. Maybe it would be better to say the rig works to 95% efficiency all the time. A conventional rig may work to 100% if you're an expert, but only 70% if you're not. He got that right, but the rest of what he wrote about the rig is mostly wrong. If the rig he sailed with was "very heavy". it was an engineering or build error. As shown in post 322, they can be quite light. If the main has a decent roach, the jib can be large, and it is almost as easy to fly extras as it is on a stayed rig. I used to fly a spinnaker off mine. There is no way the boat can sail backwards if the rig is centred and the jib is fre top run on the track. Same applies to conventional rigs with self tacking jibs. The bury can be as little as you like, but the loads get up pretty quickly. The smallest we have done was 12 years ago, 7%, bury on a 35' 3 ton open bridgedeck cat. The 50' mast was mounted on the aft side of the main beam. The boat and rig are still sailing. AeroRigs were built by Carbospars. I worked with them in the UK and they were way ahead of their time in mast building. Way behind in time and money managing. They built several Aerorigs, all of which were successful. The last one was a disaster, presumably built when they were already broke. I presume this is the one DDW's friend had. One of the Carbospars partners has since been deeply involved with the unstayed masts on Maltese Falcon and the 3 masted "A", both pretty good examples of free standing rigs. Single unstayed masts are not common on cats as the main beam or cabin are not usually far enough forward and most of them won't tack in a seway without backing the jib. Consequently, a ballestron rig is the best solution, but they are one step too far for most owners. A pity as they really de-stress sailing. Shuttleworth wrote a paper many years ago saying they were not feasible due to the loads. There have been many boats since which showed this to be wrong, but it was accepted as gospel for a while. The loads on a boat and a mast are the same regardless of stayed or unstayed. What is different is that stayed masts with travellers or tight luffed foresails load the entire boat in bending which is hard to resist,. Unstayed masts load the area around the mast at the deck and heel in tension, which is easy to resist. see post 322 for how little material is required. Airwick, Sorry to miss your point. I got a bit excited about someone saying cruisng proas make sense. ;-) Shunting used to be about sailing onto a reach, dropping one jib, pulling up another, raising one rudder, lowering the other and rotating the boom through 180 degrees and sheeting it on hard with a 4:1mainsheet. Harryproas have no jibs, rudders which work as well as NACA0012 sections in both directions and self vanging mains with 1:1 sheets. You dump the main sheet(s) and pull it in with the new sheet, luffing hard using both of the fore and aft rudders to get onto the new course. As the race boats are so light, they stop and start very quickly. They would not be an issue at a top mark in a mixed fleet. Fast boats are about weight, sail area/RM and length. A proa does these better than a cat or tri. The small loss of distance from shunting is more than overcome by the better speed the rest of the time. Yet no one races proas in ocean races. And as the race fleets get more and more into the big bucks range, the boats perform so well that an untried boat which is say 10% faster because of it's type, is left behind because it does not have the same level of gear and expertise. Amarylis was not banned. There are numerous threads on Boat Design.net quoting many sources to show this. The AC45's have rules requiring stayed rigs. As DDW says, stayed racing rigs have 100+ years of development time over unstayed ones. The Trimama guys, along with me and a few of the others were in it to try new ideas. Where we finished was incidental, although winning (or finishing in my case) would have been nice. Once you have raced in a boat of your own design, with ideas no one else has tried, it is pretty boring racing on a conventional boat. Seagul, Nice looking rig, but symmetric wings are pretty poor performers. Some big names involved, though. What has happened to the boat since 2013? Unfortunately, the AC boats look like having a D section mast with a 2 surface sail. I don't doubt that they will improve it, but there are already a couple of pretty good examples of this. Heru Sails in Italy and the guys in Perth to name 2.
  6. Caribbean 600

    7 or 8 crew is more enjoyable than 15. 2 or 3 is more enjoyable than 7 or 8. Especially if the boat is set up so the wives, kids or non sailing friends of those 2 or 3 can do the race in comfort, without having to do any work, are not in the way, in danger, likely to be scared, wet or cold and don't have to move when they don't want to. "carbon or dyneema" referred to the standing rigging. If a modern halyard lock meets the requirements below, please let me know. Plonking unstayed rigs on boats designed for stayed rigs is not optimal. Design the boat for an unstayed rig and it will be lighter overall, although non bridgedeck cats may require some not very pretty structure to support the mast. Stayed masts require the entire structure between the traveller, forestay and shrouds to be immensely strong to stop it bending or driving the mast through the bottom. An unstayed rig requires horizontal support at the deck and keel which is far easier to provide. The 15m harryproa in the video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8chR6DAFjGA weighs 3 and a bit tons/tonnes in cruise trim. The mast is supported with 2 kgs/4.4 lbs of carbon tow ($US80) at the deck, a ring frame and 2 cedar braces (12" long 2" x 2"/ 300mm x 50mm x 50mm) glassed in with 5 kgs of double bias glass. there is no traveller, forebeam, shroud bulkheads or massve main and rear beams. We are working on a couple of other attributes of unstayed masts which stayed ones don't have. 1) It is quite simple to make an unstayed mast telescope, allowing more sail up high in light air and lower centre of gravity and less windage when reefed. 2) An unstayed mast can have the sail attached to it with hoops. Done right (which we haven't yet, but are getting close), these place the sail on the lee side of the mast, decreasing the turbulence and reducing the weight, cost and complexity by eliminating the mast track, rcb cars and mast bearings. Combined, these 2 attributes allow for a larger, stiffer, lighter mast section to be used. The mast on the harryproa in the video weighs 120 kgs and is built from carbon and glass. The boat has a righting moment of 18,000 kgms, the same as a 6 ton 12m/40' cruising cat or tri. No reason why it would not work just as well on one of them. 60 years ago no one raced cats, because "if they were quicker, everyone would use them". Shunting can be a little slower than tacking, but is less likely to be a screw up. Mark roundings are no more exciting than they are with tacking cats. Proas are slowly catching on as more people start to understand them. Trimama, the 3 rigs tri was in the 2 handed Round Britain with us. Nice guys, they had some good ideas, but were almost as short of money as we were. Over a third of the entries were multis, 25' to 80' and few of them looked alike. Several of them were experimental, but 2/3rds of them finished. The weather was far harsher than the C600, where less than 15% were multis, none of which could be described as cheap and experimental and only 1/3rd of whom finished. My point? The "advantage" of Trimama was that they got to compete in a race against the world's best on a budget boat, talk to like minded loonies and have a cool time doing it. These days, not so much. I was referring to Fujin, but happy to oblige for the HH. I did not mention catamarans. There are far more cost effective ways of going fast comfortably and safely than cats. HH 66 Specifications - LOA : 20m/66', BOA :8.7m/28.5', Sail area: 217 sqm/2332 sq', Displacement Lightship:17,000 kg/37,479 lb, Draft:1.9m/ 6' - 4.00 m, 13' Payload: 4,000 kg, 8,800 lb Bruce Number (power to weight, the most reliable means of comparing speed potential, the higher the BN, the faster the boat): 1.4 Wind strength to fly a hull assuming full sail: 20 knots Resale loss, $2.3 million dollars after 12 months http://www.yachtworld.com/boats/2017/HH-Catamarans-HH66-3068735/United-States#.WqMYM2Z7FsY The C60 harryproa http://harryproa.com/?p=1747 LOA: 18m/60′, BOA: 9m/30′, Weight: 4,000 kgs/8,800 lb, Sail Area: 130 sq m/1,075 sq’, Draft: 400mm/18″- 2m/6’8″, Payload: 3,000 kgs/6,600 lbs Bruce Number (power to weight, the most reliable means of comparing speed potential, the higher the BN, the faster the boat): 1.6 Wind strength to fly a hull assuming full sail: 20 knots The first C60, for a live aboard family on a world cruise, is underway in Peru, from where it will be sailed, via Straits of Magellan/Cape Horn, to the Caribbean. It is a cost plus build, estimated cost $500K, based on progress so far. There is a waiting list for the next build. I have no idea what the resale values of cruising harryproa's are as none of the original owners have sold them. But even if you gave a C60 away after 12 months, the max loss loss is $0.5 million. Extending the length (during the build) to 66' would add less than 50 kgs/110 lbs and cost a couple of grand. Both boats have similar capsize wind strengths, the harry has a little better power to weight, so is theoretically quicker, probably offset by the H66 sail wardrobe. The harryproa weight is 24% of the HH, cost is 08%. The attached Custom 66 is currently being built in Norway. http://harryproa.com/?p=726 This is a live aboard foam and glass world cruiser/office, for 2 couples. It is on track for a finished weight around 3 tons. It is amateur built so costings are not reliable, but pro built, it will be significantly cheaper and faster than the C60. I down loaded the following from the HH web page and added comments on the harryproa solutions I mentioned in my post above: "Hull, deck and structure are all 100% carbon/foam" This is apparently required to provide stiffness for the highly tensioned rig, although I suspect it is more to add glamour to the sales brochure. The harryproa rig is unstayed, with no riggng loads, so can be built with fibreglass. "6m/20' long, curved daggerboards are constructed from prepreg carbon", Daggerboards are not required on the harryproa as the rudders are over sized and located at 25% and 75% of the length, making the dagger boards redundant. They kick up in a collision and can be lifted for balance and shallow water resulting in minimum draft of 18 inches vs 6 feet on the HH which is keel boat territory. There are no holes below the waterline so no worrying about grounding or hitting floating debris and destroying the boards and rudders and/or ripping a hole in the bottom of the boat. "Prepreg carbon mast, boom and longeron" A carbon mast is worth the money, but the small benefits of prepreg vs infused are well outweighed by it's cost and complexity (freezers, heaters, high temp moulds). A longeron (and forebeam/striker) are not required if there are no headsails. Nor is any foredeck work or getting up at 2 am in a rain squall to battle with a flogging sail when the furler fails. "Rigging is all carbon fibre and aramid" An unstayed mast does not need these. Nor does it need all the maintenance, careful setting up and tuning. Install it and forget about it until it needs repainting. "Carbon wheels mounted on swinging pedestals allow the helmsman to sit outboard" (in the wind, spray and rain so he can see the sails) Good idea, harryproas have the same, except the helmsman can comfortably see the sails and is sheltered from the wind in both positions. "Push button, hydraulic mainsheet controls" Lousy idea, complex, heavy and prone to fail compared to the harryproa solution of a self vanging wishbone boom and a lightly loaded sheet on a winch with an auto sheet dump at a predetermined angle of pitch or heel. "raised helm station" These are an abomination. You can't see under the headsail, get a stiff neck looking at the main, are cut off from the rest of the crew, exposed to the wind and/or looking through a wet windscreen, need to climb up to get in them and have nothing to brace against in a seaway. The harryproa has the helm in the lee of the cabin rather than behind it so the helmsman is out of the wind with a clear view of the sails and horizon, with the option of ducking into the cabin (with the wheel on it's pivot) if it starts raining. "Electric dinghy davits" Davits put the dinghy weight in the worst possible position (apart from up the mast or hanging over the bow) so it needs to be small and light. Mount it amidships and it can be much bigger and more powerful. The C60 tender is 7.5m/25′ long, 1.9m/6’2″ wide, with seating for 8 and an outboard from 15-70 hp. "Cockpit seating for 6 and a dining table for 7 on a boat that sleeps 8" (although the 2 double bow bunks are unusable in a seaway) is arse about face and not very sociable. The C60sleeps 6 (plus 2 temporarily), has dining tables for 8 (plus 8 more if required) and cockpit seating for 30. The cockpit seating allows a view forward so you don't feel enclosed. "Forward cockpit/internal helm" Only required because a bridge deck catamaran cockpit is such an awful place to sail from. Not that a forward cockpit is much better in a breeze, according to the Elvis guys. "Halyard locks" are a great idea if they also operate at the headboard when the main is reefed (this is important to relieve the horizontal load on the mast track), do not require extra lines to operate them, are fail safe (can be released from the deck if the halyard and release lines are broken or waving in the breeze), maintenance free and cheap. Harryproa halyard locks meet these requirements, weigh about 200 gr/7 oz and cost about 10 bucks. "2 x 80 ho Yanmar diesels with saildrives, 12 kw genset and 200 gallons of fuel to run them" Sail drives are notorious for leaking, hitting things, fouling (ropes and growth), maintenance and generally being a pain in the butt. 3 inboard diesels are 3 more major things to maintain and worry about. The C60 is light and easily driven, so a single large, easily accessible outboard drives the boat at 10 knots, with a small retractable and steerable electric motor under the bridge deck for maneuvering. It is possible, as well as less smelly and quieter to get by on solar panels and batteries for electric power. "84,000 BTU air con" Maybe in a sticky marina or on the hard but should be unnecessary if the ventilation is good while sailing/anchored. Cool air from under the bridgedeck, near the water surface, vented through the boat and out the roof works well. etc etc. If you want more examples or a more detailed explanation of these, and don't want to be subjected to the "manly" abuse on this forum, email me at harryproa@gmail.com I appreciate that this does not cater for different tastes and preferences. It is simply an example of how winding the spiral towards light, low cost and simple can give the same performance as heavy, complex and expensive.
  7. Caribbean 600

    Good idea on the simulation. We are collaborating with the Australian Maritime College on a foiling solar powered ferry for use on the Great Barrier Reef. Lots of fun brainstorming with some really bright people. They have a huge towing tank and (I think) a wind tunnel. I will suggest this as a topic for them to investigate. Soft wings with tails would be safer (and cheaper) than stayed masts and the resulting huge loads and expensive gear to control the sail shapes. But then so would almost anything. Lots of smart people are working on it, and making progress, but there is a way to go before the wings are usable and efficient. And considerably more to get the tails working as effectively as a good crew. We were going to build an Omer Wing Sail (I am their Aus agent, which is pretty meaningless, but keeps me up to date) for a 50'ter, but the owner ran out of cash so it is on the back burner. It will be interesting to see if the AC does for two surface sails what it did for foils. Trackday/ASP, will reply to you tomorrow.
  8. Caribbean 600

    Make up your mind. These 2 statements are incompatible. And wrong. These events (unexpected capsizes) have been happening for decades and still are, which implies that no one is "smarter or more cautious" and no one is "learning". In part this is because anyone (Overlay, Scot) who points out that the design is fundametally flawed gets shouted down by the gung ho crowd, many of whom have vested interests in the status quo as they are still designing, building, selling and sailing boats with the same flaws If boat owners are so keen to be "manly", at the risk of theirs and their crews lives, then it is about time that "RC's looked harder". As you noted, no sheet release solutions will work reliably in this situation as long as boats have swept back shrouds to prevent the main being eased completely. Once this is accepted, the solution is easy, see post 207. Unfortunately, it won't happen until the "I'm a real man, I sail on boats where people can die" types accept that safety is more important than going fast and/or someone sells, designs, sails on or owns a boat on which someone dies due to a known fault. Once boat owners do realise there is an alternative to capsizing when a half decent, easily anticipated gust hits them and their 7 "highly experienced" multihull crew, they might also start to rethink the need for all the other expensive and heavy gear on the boat. Things like multiple winches, some of them electric with gen sets , batteries and fuel to run them, travellers, complex halyard locks, multiple furlers, carbon and dyneema rigging, mast rams, hydraulics, curved boards, complex instruments, systems and sails requiring 7 crew plus their food and safety gear and time consuming build methods using expensive materials. Then add on the extra material required to withstand all these loads and the full time crew to look after it all. Remove and replace that lot with smart solutions, and you end up with a boat that is ~25% of the weight, same sail area, ~10% of the cost, uncapsizable, 2 or 3 crew and maintenance being a quick look over things before putting to sea and a hose down at the end of the race. Would it be as fast? The first one wouldn't be, maybe not the second, but speed for offshore multis is a function of sail area, length and weight, so it is only a matter of development. No need to be abusive. My assumptions are from DDW's theory. If there was more wind before the gust, the boat would have had speed to luff and the apparent wind angle change would have been less. It would not matter how strong the gust was, it would still have capsized the boat. DDW did not mention sea state as it is immaterial in this scenario. Until/unless one of the crew of Fujin come on and tell us what really happened, this is the best theory so far, particularly as it also explains several other multihull capsizes. Overlay You and me on the same side! Watch out for flying pigs. ;-) For those interested, I have changed the wand operated sheet dump. Instead of cleating the mainsheet on the rod attached to the wand, there is an upright stick on the wand with a pulley hooked over it. The mainsheet runs through this, then to the winch. Once the wand comes out of the water, the rod rotates, the pulley falls off and the mainsheet is released. This way, the device is always ready to operate, with no crew input and it does not matter if the handle is in the winch, the sheet is in the self tailer or the crew is standing on the sheet, half asleep The only requirement is that the eased sheet length is enough for the boom to weathercock and there is nothing for the released pulley to hit. Neither is hard to arrange on a rig that does not need a traveller. Comments/flaws/etc appreciated. dcn, it could even be made to work on a jib.
  9. Caribbean 600

    As Gerald, DDW, Pete Goss and Paul Larson (who also crewed on TP) have said, free standing masts are not slow. For cruisers, they are a no brainer due to their ease of use, safety and lack of maintenance. On a boat where the crew is not continually trimming or worrying about impending squalls, they are faster. No one is saying you shouldn't race anyway you want to, nor has anyone criticised Greg for doing so (just seen Overlay's post, which I guess some sensitive folk might take as criticism ;-)). I just wish Greg, or one of his crew would post a description of what happened so we can learn from it. However, would you be so gung ho if the chips had fallen a little tiny bit the other way? If the guy who swam out through the cockpit in his life jacket got tangled in a sheet tail and drowned; the guys who swam round the back couldn't reach the jackstay to get on board; the grab bag with the epirb had floated away or wasn't reachable; if it had been 35 knots in the open ocean with seas to match and no one close by to rescue them; if the helmsman or trimmers with nothing to stop them had fallen 20' and landed on their heads on the other side, or any of the other incidents which have happened before, then been ignored because someone thinks they lead to "a go slow option" or that it is not "manly" to prepare for them. If any of these happened and led to even more restrictive rules, i would be pissed off, but not as pissed off as the dead people's family and friends. If Fujin was insured and claims, everyone else's premiums have just gone up, or become harder to get. The hairy chested crowd should note that, despite "sailing like men" in a "wicked fast rocket ship", they did not win. In fact, they were overtaken by the entire fleet, including the cruising monos. dcnblues, I said jibs are hard to dump and that is one reason why I don't design for them. You asked for a jib sheet dump, i gave you the only one that will work reliably. And yes, you will have to alter it every time you alter the sheet (not very often in capsize conditions) and be careful where you route it. Stays are even more dangerous when it comes to avoiding capsize. If there are no stays, there is nothing for the boom to hit. Once you start compromising on safety, then snubbers and other stuff becomes necessary. 3 seconds is not much time to luff into the wind at 8 knots with stalled foils and sails (DDW's Fujin scenario). It is heaps of time to dump a lightly loaded sheet (no traveller if it has a wishbone or self vanging boom) on a sail which can swing round until it is completely downwind. Gerald, I have a Norwegian client who wants to experiment with wing sails and is looking for a boat and builder to test some ideas and i don't have time. If you are interested in doing so, could you drop me an email, please. harryproa@gmail.com
  10. Caribbean 600

    Sounds feasible, given that it indubitably capsized and we have no other information. Is there anything they could/should have done to avoid/prepare for it, apart from DDW's suggestions of faster reactions on the sheets and tiller, luffing hard and a bit more respect to a known wind funnel like Saba? Gerald, Agree about unstayed rigs. Imagine how things would be if Team Phillips had been built properly, realised it's potential and won The Race. Cue the usual photos of TP without a bow, which is nothing to do with the staying configuration of the rig.
  11. Caribbean 600

    All makes sense. Especially the last sentence ;-)) A couple of considerations: Even with staysail and reefed main in 10 knots of breeze, they would have enough speed (7, 8 knots?) to luff or bear away if they had reacted when the gust hit and 2) The wind directions shown on US7070's, chart are only 10-15 degrees different from lull to gust so unlikely the sail would be stalled if it was the same when they went past. SeaGul, Also makes sense. When flying a hull, as opposed to burying the bow(s), the response on most multis should be to luff and dump the sheets, especially the jib/spinnaker sheets. Luffing does add some centrifugal force to the boat, but if it is far enough over for this to be significant, it is probably too late, both for the rudders to be effective and for the hull to come down. For the 99%: always be thinking about your response to the events that will require instant action (flying a hull, nosediving, man overboard, hitting something) so that you respond automatically rather than spend a precious second or two thinking about it. Make a habit of doing this each time you come on watch and again when you take the helm, and again when approaching a potential "situation" (crew in a position to fall overboard, seas building, approaching the lee of an island or a squall, increasing/decreasing sail, etc). When you hit the sack, always envisage what it will be like if you wake up and the boat is upside down. Plan your way out (you will be walking on the roof), what you will grab en route and what you need to avoid. It is far safer to use the escape hatch rather than exiting via the cockpit, which is a death trap, with the added risk of being washed out the back and losing contact with the boat. It also gives you a chance to get into some warm clothes and wet weather gear, and the option to stay inside. Upside down multis with waves breaking over them at night are bloody cold, even in the tropics. The best bunk in the boat is the one nearest the escape hatch. ASP, Smart move, and thanks for the information so far. If you could ask your contact to post here, or ask Greg (owner) to do so, maybe we can get the details and learn the lessons.
  12. Caribbean 600

    Your terminology is good, and I guess, if the force was high enough, a knot in the main sheet may not suffice. But in that case, the snubber when not under max shock load would keep the boom a fair distance away from the shrouds, when it needs to be eased as much as possible. If it was me, and the breeze and loads were high enough that I couldn't drag the main down against the force wrapping it around the shrouds, I would granny tack instead of gybe. And while I was fighting with the flogging sails, shitting my pants through the zone of death (broad reaching) and hoping my rudders weren't going to break when I was stuck in irons and going backwards, I would be thinking: "none of this would be necessary with an unstayed rig." Curved boards are different. Leaving the leeward one up and the ww one down is not an option as their forces are towards the cabin and upwards. The ww one pushes to leeward and lifts the hull. At 45 degrees of heel, I doubt the lee one is making much of a contribution unless the boat is going fast, but what there is, is adding to the capsize forces. Thanks for the compliment. I can't think of a useful solution for the jib either (apart from replacing it with a second mainsail ;-)). Maybe rig a trip line to a sensitive snap shackle holding the sheet to the sail. Not elegant as you need to adjust the trip line each time you adjust the sail (not very often in capsize conditions) and run the trip line from the trigger to the snap shackle. USU have an electric trip on their schematic, so maybe ask them. Or, if you are confident about containing and firing them, load up the shotgun shells! Releasing the sheets is fast and reliable, unless someone has left it in the self tailer with the handle still in, is standing in the sheet coils, hanging to leeward of the winch holding onto the sheet, fallen from windward onto the winch, or momentarily not paying attention due to being firehosed. If the sheet is too short to allow the headsail all the way out, or the stays stop the mainsail going all the way out, then releasing them may not be enough. The 2 sheets and the traveller all have to be eased, which means 3 people all working together at the same time, 4 if you count the driver who should be bearing away or luffing up. Easing the sheet a comparatively small amount is enough to stop the hull flying as you will see if you watch the small sheet movements on beach cats, which are way more overpowered than offshore cats. A major ease means it has been left too late, in which case a second or so's difference between a smoked sheet and a sheet disconnected from the sail could make the difference. Hence a trigger, which you should never have to use if you are sailing sensibly, but if you do have to, should keep you upright. It is always sad to hear of a capsize. Hopefully we learn all the details so we don't make the same mistakes. The ditch bag and the liferaft must be accessible when the boat is upside down, on fire, sinking or in pieces after being rammed by a ship. It is a difficult problem and a good reason for personal EPIRBS, lifejackets and a good look out, including behind or under the jib. Thanks again. If the gust caused the hull to fly before the boat got moving, and the sheets were dumped before it got to 35 degrees, then 15 seconds (vs the usual 3-5) is a long time to be hanging. Plenty of time to luff or bear away, if that would have helped. With nothing to support him to leeward, at what angle was the helmsman hanging on, unable to steer? Did he inadvertently bear away as he lost his footing, hung off the wheel and his hands went from 12 o'clock to 9 o'clock? Were the sails flogging? ie completely eased or still contributing heeling force? Was the traveller smoked as well? How did the diesel get on the bottom of the boat? How did the short jackstay get past the safety inspection? I am asking all this because what usually happens when a multi capsizes is that one of the crew, or the designer (Chris White on the Atlantics, Rushour a month ago, etc) goes public with a detailed description of what happened, what went wrong (there is always something, shit does not just happen) and what they would do to correct it next time. There is no compulsion to do so, but if they do, others are saved from making the same mistakes. So far, all we know is the wind was strong enough (how strong would it have to be?) to get under the 3 ton hull at 35 degrees of heel and blow the boat over while 7 crew smoked the sheets then stood around for 10 seconds at 45 degrees of heel waiting to see what would happen and the only lessons are that the ditch bag should be near the hatch, lifejackets are buoyant and jack stays should be within reach. US7070, Thanks for the chart and info. The capsize was at 2020. Nowhere near perfect, just safer, more comfortable, lighter, cheaper and easier to build and operate. Probably faster as well. If none of these are important to you, ignore them. If you want to discuss how and why, either read www.harryproa.com, start a new thread or add something meaningful to this one. Instead of following me round the forum firing cheap shots, maybe you could ask the Fujin guys what really happened. Given the calibre of the crew it is unlikely that "We did not react quickly enough to ease the mainsheet, traveler and jib and the boat went over" is the full story and is not much help in preventing it happening to someone else.
  13. Caribbean 600

    My first Hobart was 43 years ago in a skinny, overpowered, underbuilt 50' harbour racer. 16 crew, only 3 had raced offshore before. Upwind race in a downwind flyer. Not enough bunks, so we slept in our useless wet weather gear (45 years ago) on the sails under the leaky deck. It was unusual to have an off watch without an all hands on deck to fix a breakage or a sail change gone wrong. 60 knots under trisail wondering what to do if it blew any harder. 4th highest handicap, below mid fleet finish, 3rd last on corrected time. Most of us loved it, the others never sailed again. Completely stuffed when we arrived. Then I grew up/old and raced to Hobart on Verbatim/Bullfrog (40'Crowther tri). 4 crew on a boat superbly set up for 1-2 people and immaculately prepared. Go off watch, take off the foulies and put on pyjamas for uninterrupted sleep in a warm bunk in the middle of the boat. Half an hour before you were due on watch, a hot cuppa and a snack in bed. Because of this, we were all well rested when Sovereign (state of the art maxi, full of heavies) caught us at Cape Raoul after a 20-30 knot beat down the Tassie coast. We did 3 headsail changes (with hanks) across Storm Bay (they did none), caught them in the river, then lost them at the end by 20 minutes. We started 40 minutes behind them, so a moral victory. My point being, that it is possible to get a good nights kip on an offshore multi, if it is set up properly. Yeah. Never ceases to amaze me what owners and crew will put up with. Especially when most of it is unnecessary. Exposed helms and trimmers, bunks in the ends, ridiculous rigs, no auto sheet dumps, blind spots to leeward, intricate equipment that fails if it is not nursed, non kick up rudders and boards, heavy construction, expensive building methods, excessive deck gear, half the crew leaning hard on a 3mm lifeline, to name a few. Thanks to you and the 'horse'. Next time you see him, could you ask what sails they had up (reefs in the main, headsails) and how far the daggerboards were down? What is "stood up" in "15 seconds from stood up to on it's side"? What, if anything did they do in that 15 seconds? Any idea of the angle of heel when the sheets were smoked? Fujin would have positive rm up to ~70 degrees of heel. Smoking the sheets would immediately reduce the pressure. How high was the hull flying when they smoked 'em? How did the helmsman react? Up, down or neither? Finally, any stories on getting out of the cockpit and onto the bridgedeck? Thanks for your help. Hopefully we can learn some lessons from this, once we know the full story.
  14. Caribbean 600

    You may wish to think about this a bit, particularly if you or someone you know are the casualty and/or your decisions or actions caused it. Not at all. And it applies to racing multis offshore as well, especially in respect of the high potential for "casualties". It is doubly irresponsible if the mistakes you make have already been made by someone else, but you have not learnt from them. The trigger is a rotating plate with 2 cam cleats on it attached to the wand. If the wand leaves the water, the plate rotates, the main sheets slip out of the cleats, the sails totally depower (no stays, no traveller) and the boat stops. Rather than carry high explosive devices, I prefer to remove the loads and have a schooner rig rather than a jib. Not just lower loads, but no foredeck work and less deck gear and trimming required. A bit more expensive, depending on how many headsails, extras, winches and furling gear you carry, but much less stress, especially at 2 am when a rain squall comes through. Instead of flailing around on the foredeck in your pyjamas with a flogging, partially furled headsail, you just dump the sheets and wait till the squall passes. I am not a big fan of electronics on boats, unless there is someone paid to look after them. Time spent maintaining gadgets is time not sailing. Mechanical devices are not affected by salt water, flat batteries or corrosion. USU is cool gear, as are electric sheet winches, as long as nothing goes wrong. A snubber is pretty useless, a knot in the end of the sheet will have the same affect. When overpowered downwind, the sail jammed against the stays is not a good look. You may "Hate that our skills and experience/seamanship are called into question here" but how hard you push should be a function of the wind, waves, boat and crew, not whether someone else capsizes. That is seamanship. Pushing so hard that you fall over is not. See KC375's comment above about casualties. Plus your guys made two beginner errors (too many turns on the winch and standing to leeward of a sheet winch) in your Atlantic crossing. It is not only about how many miles you have done. Smart sailors learn from others mistakes, before they make them themselves. Regardless of/despite that, you sailed a brilliant race. Well done. Sounds like it was a lot of fun. It is an interesting discussion if people are up front about what they do and went wrong and others can question and discuss it without getting a hard time and cheap insults. On the subject of what you do: what is a line pod? How do you communicate with the helm and main trimmers from the front cockpit? How do you know when to dump the sheet if you are "under a firehose" so presumably unable to see or hear what is going on? What do you do on a broad reach or bear away when the main is against the shrouds, the headsail is dumped and the boat is still over pressed? Why does the helmsman sit on an exposed seat and the jib trimmers in the forward cockpit, all getting the firehose treatment instead of inside the boat at the sheltered helm/sheet station? Two. One due to a slow hydraulic dump, the other for the same stupid/lack of seamanship reasons attributed to Fujin. "I did not react quickly enough to ease the jib and the boat went over" My excuses were that we were winning, I was tired, I was the only one on deck, the gear was cheap and crappy, prep time was short, I was having a great time pushing the limits and had ~50,000 offshore miles so thought I knew everything there was to know. None of which made any difference. It was still stupid/poor seamanship. 11 hours in a liferaft in the North Atlantic started me thinking that fast, safe and low cost are not exclusive, and ever since I have been trying to prove this, with a fair bit of success, especially as the rest of the performance multi world has gone in the opposite direction. For what it is worth, I have also done 7 Sydney-Hobarts, one of them in a 40' trimaran. It is not about high horses. It is about education. Not for those who know it all, but the other 99% of multihull sailors. Instead of following me round the forum firing cheap shots, maybe you could ask the Fujin guys what really happened. Given the calibre of the crew is it unlikely that "We did not react quickly enough to ease the mainsheet, traveler and jib and the boat went over" is the full story and is not much help in preventing it happening to someone else. Maybe it was the usual cause of things going pear shaped on the morning of the first night? Everyone stays up enjoying the race and the ride rather than getting some sleep. Often not helped by the experienced steerers and trimmers having been on since the start. Around midnight they start dozing off and control is handed over to the B team, some of whom may not have sailed the boat much at night, much less steered or trimmed it in survival conditions in a race. I am not saying this did happen, just including it as another note of caution for the 99%. Start your watch sytem after a daylight dinner.
  15. Caribbean 600

    The sheet dump only activates if you are sailing unsafely (stern out of the water far enough to trigger the dump), so you have already exceeded "extreme care". Hydraulic dumps are notorious for not working when needed and/or working too slowly. The spare sheets (one per sail) are tied to the clew of the jib (or Code sail) and the end of the boom and lead forward to the tack of the sail, where they are coiled and loosely tied off. There is no need to trim or touch them until the sail is reefed, unreefed or removed. The boom one could be permanent. When the sheet dump happens, the attachment of the normal sheet to the clew (jib) or boom (main) is opened, not destroyed. This could be a number of things, but think of a big snap shackle or KC's seat belt hasp. After the sheet dump, the main is flogging or pinned against the shrouds and the jib is flogging out in front of the boat. The spare jib sheet is undone from the tack of the sail and lead through a deck block to a winch. It is way over length, so not loaded or flogging much. It is winched on until the fully eased jib sheet can be re-attached. Two other crew members are repeating the process with the spare main sheet. The loads on the spare sheets are small as they are only used to get the sail on enough to re attach the normal sheets. The whole operation takes a couple of minutes, less for a prepared crew. dcn blues, You haven't heard of it because it doesn't exist. We are fitting a simpler version of it to a couple of harryproas (60 and 66' ters). Simpler because there are no headsails and the main sheet load is far lower than on cats due to a wishbone boom and no shrouds. Re skills and experience on Elvis: "It was a very sobering moment (Fujin capsizing) to realize just how wrong things can go and we were happy to lift off the gas pedal a bit and keep things in one piece for the rest of the race." It should not have taken a capsize to realise this. Re making the same mistakes that has lead to countless other capsizes: "armed with what we learned, I would not hesitate to step onboard with the crew we had and do this race again aboard Fujin." You should not have to repeat other people's mistakes to learn from them. Lastly, one from Fujin for the "Shit happens" crowd: "We did not react quickly enough to ease the mainsheet, traveler and jib and the boat went over" after coming out of the lee of an island notorious for strong gusts, in the dark. This isn't shit happening, or "pushing too hard", it is poor seamanship.