• Announcements

    • UnderDawg

      A Few Simple Rules   05/22/2017

      Sailing Anarchy is a very lightly moderated site. This is by design, to afford a more free atmosphere for discussion. There are plenty of sailing forums you can go to where swearing isn't allowed, confrontation is squelched and, and you can have a moderator finger-wag at you for your attitude. SA tries to avoid that and allow for more adult behavior without moderators editing your posts and whacking knuckles with rulers. We don't have a long list of published "thou shalt nots" either, and this is by design. Too many absolute rules paints us into too many corners. So check the Terms of Service - there IS language there about certain types of behavior that is not permitted. We interpret that lightly and permit a lot of latitude, but we DO reserve the right to take action when something is too extreme to tolerate (too racist, graphic, violent, misogynistic, etc.). Yes, that is subjective, but it allows us discretion. Avoiding a laundry list of rules allows for freedom; don't abuse it. However there ARE a few basic rules that will earn you a suspension, and apparently a brief refresher is in order. 1) Allegations of pedophilia - there is no tolerance for this. So if you make allegations, jokes, innuendo or suggestions about child molestation, child pornography, abuse or inappropriate behavior with minors etc. about someone on this board you will get a time out. This is pretty much automatic; this behavior can have real world effect and is not acceptable. Obviously the subject is not banned when discussion of it is apropos, e.g. talking about an item in the news for instance. But allegations or references directed at or about another poster is verboten. 2) Outing people - providing real world identifiable information about users on the forums who prefer to remain anonymous. Yes, some of us post with our real names - not a problem to use them. However many do NOT, and if you find out someone's name keep it to yourself, first or last. This also goes for other identifying information too - employer information etc. You don't need too many pieces of data to figure out who someone really is these days. Depending on severity you might get anything from a scolding to a suspension - so don't do it. I know it can be confusing sometimes for newcomers, as SA has been around almost twenty years and there are some people that throw their real names around and their current Display Name may not match the name they have out in the public. But if in doubt, you don't want to accidentally out some one so use caution, even if it's a personal friend of yours in real life. 3) Posting While Suspended - If you've earned a timeout (these are fairly rare and hard to get), please observe the suspension. If you create a new account (a "Sock Puppet") and return to the forums to post with it before your suspension is up you WILL get more time added to your original suspension and lose your Socks. This behavior may result a permanent ban, since it shows you have zero respect for the few rules we have and the moderating team that is tasked with supporting them. Check the Terms of Service you agreed to; they apply to the individual agreeing, not the account you created, so don't try to Sea Lawyer us if you get caught. Just don't do it. Those are the three that will almost certainly get you into some trouble. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DO ONE OF THESE THINGS, please do the following: Refrain from quoting the offending text, it makes the thread cleanup a pain in the rear Press the Report button; it is by far the best way to notify Admins as we will get e-mails. Calling out for Admins in the middle of threads, sending us PM's, etc. - there is no guarantee we will get those in a timely fashion. There are multiple Moderators in multiple time zones around the world, and anyone one of us can handle the Report and all of us will be notified about it. But if you PM one Mod directly and he's off line, the problem will get dealt with much more slowly. Other behaviors that you might want to think twice before doing include: Intentionally disrupting threads and discussions repeatedly. Off topic/content free trolling in threads to disrupt dialog Stalking users around the forums with the intent to disrupt content and discussion Repeated posting of overly graphic or scatological porn content. There are plenty web sites for you to get your freak on, don't do it here. And a brief note to Newbies... No, we will not ban people or censor them for dropping F-bombs on you, using foul language, etc. so please don't report it when one of our members gives you a greeting you may find shocking. We do our best not to censor content here and playing swearword police is not in our job descriptions. Sailing Anarchy is more like a bar than a classroom, so handle it like you would meeting someone a little coarse - don't look for the teacher. Thanks.

harryproa

Members
  • Content count

    571
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About harryproa

  • Rank
    Anarchist

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0

Recent Profile Visitors

5,479 profile views
  • mwr

  1. You have obviously not shunted on a boat set up to do it properly. Dump the sheet, pull in the new one and the boat stops in less than it's own length. The rudders rotate automatically and you are sailing in the other direction. Whether you could do this in 10m at high speed is a moot point, but you could certainly luff head to wind, then sail off in the opposite direction. Again, if the proa is set up properly. The following was written by an experienced beach cat sailor: "I watched Rob shunt his 7.5m/25' proa upwind up the narrow (35m/115' wide for most of it) boat filled channel in front of his house so fast and easy I thought he must've had an electric motor hidden in the leeward hull. I would've had a very difficult time doing it in a beach cat without stalling, hitting somebody's boat and/or breaking out a canoe paddle. With the exception of a wind surfer, I had never seen a sailboat with a reverse gear before. He could head right for something, then throw it in reverse, back away and bolt off in a new direction under perfect control." Shunting really comes into it's own in a man overboard scenario. Drop the sheet, trim the new sheet and sail straight back to the mob and stop directly on top of him. No tacking/gybing and circling, no flogging sails and sheets and little leeway when stopped. it is also far safer in a blow. Instead of the white knuckle surf down a wave and gybe at the bottom with the main crashing across and into the shrouds, you come up onto a reach, dump the sheet, trim the new one and off you go. Upwind, it is also safer as you do not need to have enough sail up to force the boat through the eye of the wind. So, just enough sail to keep the boat moving and none of the worries about getting caught in irons, drifting backwards onto the rudders, backing headsails, etc.
  2. Certainly is. The best way to do this is to increase the section, or use carbon. Most wing masts only need it on the sides, and it can be tapered between the hounds, diamonds and gooseneck, so not much is required. Vacuum bagging will make it lighter, but is not required structurally.
  3. Smart move. I have half a ton of tow I'm selling for a friend. ~5.5 kg rolls @ $Aus50 per kg. This is Zoltek 50k, which is thick, so you cut fewer pieces. There are also ends of spools available on Ebay sometimes. I also use it for making carbon rod, bent and straight and a bunch of other uses. Gary, let me know an address and I will send you a part spool which will be enough to keep you going for a while.
  4. Tow is easier to use (goes round corners, fewer voids) and cheaper than uni.
  5. I am here to discuss proas, the loonies have been following me for 20 years. Sometimes I engage with them, sometimes I don't. You are correct about race proas not existing. No one is arguing with this. I explained why this is so inshore. Bucket List is intended to make proas round the cans friendly, but no race results yet. I have been approached by several top level offshore racers. I show them the videos of the cruisers, the proven numbers (weight, etc) for the cruisers, the proposed numbers for the racers and take them for a sail on my 25'ter. They agree that it is all feasible. They then say, 'I have no money, have to convince my sponsor, which won't happen without a live race boat getting some results'. I have been working on this for years, keep getting sidetracked. Bucket List is the latest attempt. The list of "name sailors" wanting a ride is pretty impressive, given how little publicity the boat has had. I was also approached to design a harry for an experienced French offshore racer to the Open 50 rule for the Route de Rhum. He wanted something to make the race more interesting than the TJV and had the necessary concessions for it to be a proa. The upshot of this was Solitarry. The client showed it to the Open 50 guys, who changed the class rules so it could not compete. The client pulled out. So, in my experience, there are no offshore race proas because no one wants to be first, vested interests are against it and no one wants to spend money on something untried. I doubt this is the full story or anything like it. If you want a deeper analysis, ask one of the half dozen or so offshore guys who are good enough to tell their sponsors what they are sailing rather than ask them. I have no idea why few top designers design proas. Or, when they do, they totally screw them up (Team Pure and Wild). I did a feasibility study for a client for a harry for The Race. On paper, it was faster than the cats (longer, lighter, smaller crew). The client asked me to discuss it with a top designer, which I did. He said "the numbers make sense, but proas are nuts, would never work". He has since been proven totally wrong. Maybe this attitude is prevalent amongst the rest of top designers, but i doubt it. Regardless, they don't post here, so you will have to ask them directly as well. Boat speed is about length, sail area and righting moment for the least weight. Do you agree that potentially proas do this better than cats and tris? So it then comes down to experience, although, as you say this didn't stop foils happening. Bucket List is intended to supply this experience. Then maybe things will change. Or not. Either way it will be fun finding out. Not sure whether this "addresses the issue" for you or not, but it is as good as I can do. As I asked in my previous post, I would be very interested to hear what you consider the problem to be. If you answer this, see if you do it without sounding like one of the loonies. Yes, I agree that potentially proas do that better than catamarans and trimarans. But since you are focused on offshore racing I don't think boats speed is about length, sail area and righting moment solely. Foiling has changed that game and even before that RTW boats were actually reducing sail area rather than looking to increase it. Sea state is often a limiting factor. RTW boats are often not sailed at their full potential. A game changer now is maybe increasing top end which seems focused on foils, addressing sea state limitations, and finally increasing the ability to sail more easily and consistently at or nearer to full potential. Its not clear that a proa would excel in any of these areas. Interesting that you talk about The Race. How long ago was that? Catamarans were all the rage, and foiling was a dream. Development continued and today trimarans and foiling rule the day. When did a catamaran last hold the RTW record? Strange that all this development and change happened but still proas were never even considered never mind built or tested even at a small scale by any serious team. It seems disingenuous to not acknowledge that there are technical reason for that. Why were RTW catamarans all replaced by trimarans, where is the development of RTW record holders focused now, and what is the implication of those answers for offshore proas? I am not focussed on offshore racing, yet. First I have to get proas around the cans quickly by addressing the handling problems involved in shunting, or at least get them to the level where the potential higher speed overcomes any slowness round the corners. Offshore is a different problem. It is (in my experience, see above) about demonstrating a proa can do it. Russ' and Ryan's efforts in this regard are a start, but let down by the boat's lack of ability round the cans. Once Bucket List works inshore, (looks promising, once I stop busting stuff) we will have a look at offshore. I don't "acknowledge any technical reasons for the lack of proa development" beyond the ones I have pointed out. What reasons do you think there are? I did not mean that too much sail area is a good thing, just that too little (sail area or rm) is a bad one. Nor that speed is only about length , sail area and rm, although these are the primary factors. Secondary ones such as lower windage, weight and structural stress, easy handling/fewer crew, acceptable impact tolerance, fewer sails, less crew exposure, safer rigs which can be driven closer to the limits, simplicity (less to break, fewer spares, less maintainence) and low cost all favour the harryproa set up. I am sure there are areas that the tri is better, beyond those I have mentioned, but, to me, they are not enough to explain why there are no proa RTW or offshore projects. Any suggestions? Sea state: 2 long hulls being pushed in different directions by waves is a lot more stress than 1 long and one short hull, particularly if the small hull is easily flown. Surfing with a lower rig on a lighter hull of the same length and freeboard (tri float vs harry lee hull) is much less likely to end in a nose dive. Full potential: A rig which can be depowered by dumping one relatively lightly loaded sheet (single unstayed mast, single sail, self vanging wishbone boom) without flogging or hitting the shrouds and reefed/unreefed on any point of sail is much easier to drive hard than one with multiple sails, particularly if the mainsheet is also the vang, which increases the sheet loads enormously. The downside of such a rig is the inability to set extras, which is also an upside in terms of weight, simplicity, ease of sailing and cost. A telescoping mast addresses this (potentially), as does making the boat as light as possible. If neither of these was sufficient, then a schooner rig would be considered. Crew who are sheltered and on the mostly flying windward hull yet can easily see the rig and the waves are able to push harder than goggled, dry suited crew trying to see what is happening through all the spray. A helmsman who does most of the work and a trimmer to dump/trim the main and the ballast if the breeze strength changes might be (I have no experience at this size) all that are required to keep the ww hull airborne most of the time. Rough estimates are that an offshore harry would weigh about a third as much as a same length tri, with about half the sail area and half the righting moment with the secondary benefits mentioned above. Would this be faster? No idea, but i would have thought it was worth looking into. Foils are indeed a game changer, and we are playing with them. Details on harryproa.com soon. Foils are one of the means by which proas may be able to shunt (tacking and gybing) as fast as a mono. Weight is an important input into foiling, same as it is to floating, so the proa still makes sense, once the handling problems are sorted. The Race was 17 years ago, my point in bringing it up was to show how a name designer at the time did not understand proas. RTW now is all about trimarans, no idea why. Maybe cats at this size are too heavy and/or unsafe? Would appreciate your input on this in regard to proas. Thanks for not acting looney. Much nicer discussing boats without all the personal abuse.
  6. I am here to discuss proas, the loonies have been following me for 20 years. Sometimes I engage with them, sometimes I don't. You are correct about race proas not existing. No one is arguing with this. I explained why this is so inshore. Bucket List is intended to make proas round the cans friendly, but no race results yet. I have been approached by several top level offshore racers. I show them the videos of the cruisers, the proven numbers (weight, etc) for the cruisers, the proposed numbers for the racers and take them for a sail on my 25'ter. They agree that it is all feasible. They then say, 'I have no money, have to convince my sponsor, which won't happen without a live race boat getting some results'. I have been working on this for years, keep getting sidetracked. Bucket List is the latest attempt. The list of "name sailors" wanting a ride is pretty impressive, given how little publicity the boat has had. I was also approached to design a harry for an experienced French offshore racer to the Open 50 rule for the Route de Rhum. He wanted something to make the race more interesting than the TJV and had the necessary concessions for it to be a proa. The upshot of this was Solitarry. The client showed it to the Open 50 guys, who changed the class rules so it could not compete. The client pulled out. So, in my experience, there are no offshore race proas because no one wants to be first, vested interests are against it and no one wants to spend money on something untried. I doubt this is the full story or anything like it. If you want a deeper analysis, ask one of the half dozen or so offshore guys who are good enough to tell their sponsors what they are sailing rather than ask them. I have no idea why few top designers design proas. Or, when they do, they totally screw them up (Team Pure and Wild). I did a feasibility study for a client for a harry for The Race. On paper, it was faster than the cats (longer, lighter, smaller crew). The client asked me to discuss it with a top designer, which I did. He said "the numbers make sense, but proas are nuts, would never work". He has since been proven totally wrong. Maybe this attitude is prevalent amongst the rest of top designers, but i doubt it. Regardless, they don't post here, so you will have to ask them directly as well. Boat speed is about length, sail area and righting moment for the least weight. Do you agree that potentially proas do this better than cats and tris? So it then comes down to experience, although, as you say this didn't stop foils happening. Bucket List is intended to supply this experience. Then maybe things will change. Or not. Either way it will be fun finding out. Not sure whether this "addresses the issue" for you or not, but it is as good as I can do. As I asked in my previous post, I would be very interested to hear what you consider the problem to be. If you answer this, see if you do it without sounding like one of the loonies.
  7. Awesome boats! 100,000 miles on proas is more than the combined proa total of everyone on this thread, i think. Funambule was probably the most successful proa apart from Cheers. It is really travelling in that picture. Probably the fastest any non speed week proa has gone. Was Rosiere (middle photo) recovered after the Route de Rhum where it capsized? What is the first one. That is some wing mast! Do you have a web page we could look at your boats, experience and solutions?
  8. Twenty years ago you could have written exactly the same thing about foiling. I don't think for minute that in another twenty years we will see a proa explosion. The dumbest thing in sailing is by far sitting on the weather rail of a yacht, what is that about, but I appreciate some people find it enjoyable so I leave them alone. The proa is very efficient - in many ways, and can be a thing of beauty, people will go on developing them and they will get better. And why do you think it is that there is so much time, effort and money going into foils and foiling in everything from dinghies to monohulls to multihulls. Its hard to find a racing class where foils are allowed where they are not being explored or already utilized. Even without foiling you have seen amazing progress in monohull and multihull design, both for catamarans and trimarans, but yet nobody of any note is doing anything with proas. Do you really think that is a coincidence? Do you really think the entire world is wrong but a few proa loons who can only seem to manage to fight with each other are right? Never ceases to amaze me how people post on discussion forums, but aren't interested in discussion. And if experience of a boat is a requirement for criticizing it, then the harry bashers should have nothing to say. LMI I got into proas from cats and tris. Just kept removing bits until there was only the minimum left, then figured out how to make it work. Simplest, easiest, lowest cost way to go sailing fast and comfortably, same reason I kite surf (and keep plugging away at kite boating) when comfort is not required. Some reasons why "no one of note is into race proas" are: They are slow to shunt upwind, fatally slow downwind. Headsails and spinnakers on round the cans races (which is what most people do) slow them down further, The caught aback problem with stayed masts. Not only the rig being blown away, but the total lack of control when the sails are pinned against the fore and back stays and the windward hull is being driven under. Doesn't happen often, but once is more than enough. Symmetric in the wrong plane looks weird, not changing sides feels weird. The early ones, apart from Cheers, were mostly beset by disasters despite showing pretty good speed. Some due to being proas (inadequate staying angles and too light lee hulls on Atlantic proas), some could have happened to anyone. This lead to Rule 1.01.01 of the safety rules: These rules do not apply to proas. They have had some pretty poor press. Well meaning, but ultimately negative. So, I agree they are crap around the cans (although all the above problems, apart from weirdness, are in the throes of being sorted). The only place they are likely to succeed is offshore. There is very little of this in open design classes, so either no one wants to take a risk with something new, or you are correct. Any others? Of course, the flat out fastest boats have often been proas (Crossbow1, Slingshot, SailRocket) I don't accept that the absurd arguments about them on forums are all negative. This is where most of my enquiries come from. Some proceed, some fade away, the rest keep in touch and are waiting for the right combination of time and money to build or buy one. So, for the sake of this discussion perhaps you could look at it from the other direction for a moment. Why would a proa not be the fastest/safest/most comfortable boat available? What, in your opinion, makes a boat fast and how do proas fail these requirements compared to cats and tris. Hopefully, this will be a more rewarding exercise than getting into a slanging match with the abuse experts. I am pretty sure a proa with non kick up rudders and dagger board would not last much longer in the log strewn R2AK than one with insufficient righting moment.
  9. I don't leave Skype on as I get too many calls at 3 am my time. Email me at harryproa@gmail, let me know a time and I will turn it on. Don't suppose you got Russ interested?
  10. You are a very strange man you say some rational things and then just make up complete lies. I started designing Proas well over thirty years ago and built my first one in 1987. In more recent years I have used two different concepts to get two working craft that used the same hull platform. How you think it is appropriate to just make up that they did not work is staggering. My 2nd proa had the side mounted rudders but they where linked to counter rotate and a proved themselves as a proa concept. A far more sophisticated and agile system than locking the rear rudder. The only issue was being slammed by waves. The same platform was then used to make a schooner rigged proa with a daggerboard that moved fore and aft again it worked. These where very low budget craft, tarp sails, old IC rigs etc. You are right I can't comment on offshore Proas but I can comment on proa design in general, control wise I believe it is much harder to create a successful small singlehanded proa than a larger multiple crewed vessel. Equally to sail on the restricted waters of a small lake requires an effective system. Post #54 does give some details but it seams very odd that nobody other than you have recorded their exploits or taken any video of the craft. I only became involved in this thread because of your appalling comments about Ryan. So I still challenge you, provide an account of someone other than you about sailing one of your craft and some video footage. I have done all my experiments for less than your are likely to have spent on Bucket Lists mainsail, (you favoured unit of currency appears to be mainsails) so please consider that when viewing my evidence My humble apologies. I was wrong to assume you had no experience. It was based on the information you provided, which obviously was not the full story. Sorry. That is a cool boat. Nothing wrong with cheap if it works. If you have any other photos, information (length, weight etc) please share it. I am particularly interested in the flat panel hulls and the rig. The rudders are too close to the water (pretty obvious and I am sure you know this). Ours are higher and the cases are sleeker. We have also done away with the triangular mounts, which also makes them easier to kick up. The linkage looks cool as well, any more details? I personally prefer to be able to use the rudders individually, or linked, but on a small boat linked makes sense. I also agree about the difficulties of small single handed proas, having designed, built, sailed and broken several of them. Large crewed pros are not easier, just different. Large single handers, like Bucket List are different again. Like I said, harryproa owners do not frequent forums where they are going to be abused. Join the harryproa yahoo chat group site and the voyages of Doug on the 25'ter, Bain on Aroha (Tasman crossing in an overloaded 40'ter), the Brisbane Gladstone race on Rare Bird, along with a lot of other harryproa sailing are in the archives. You would be very welcome there if you decided to share your proa experience. They are all proa nuts, don't care about typecasting. There are also videos of harryproas (including shunting) both there and on harryproa.com. Giving me a hard time for my comments on Ryan would hold a bit more water if you had done the same to Joe (Proa Sailor) and Russ for their comments about me, which were a lot worse. Again, sorry to have dissed your boat and your experience. Rob
  11. Juggle and Hope, watercooled Thanks. If you want to know more, or follow progress, email me direct or check out the yahoo chat group. Tink, You are correct that Bucket List is similar to a modern Pacific proa. Consequently, it would make a lousy cruiser unless it had a harry type cruising hull to windward. I design boats to fulfil a purpose, not to formulae. If lee pods, headsails or sitting to leeward make sense for a certain design, that is what i would draw. As an example, I have just sold a set of plans for an 11m/35' motor cat. Not radical at all, except for the very simple and quick construction Bucket List has a very clear operating requirement, which no other boat comes close to filling. Similar is not identical. In fact, it is quite different To improve it's performance the crew weight is to windward, except in light air, when they can sit to leeward. To lower it's cost, increase it's safety and make it easy to sail it has an unstayed mast with no headsails. So it can run aground and hit logs etc with minimal damage, it has (had, broke one of them today, see the harryproa chat group for details) kick up, beam mounted rudders. To make it cheap to produce ($50,000), and charter ($500/day) it is Intelligently Infused. For low cost maintenance, it is not faired (the hulls are fair due to the build process, but there are some fittings that could be a bit more cosmetic) and is painted with house paint. The windward hull has less drag/wetted surface than any pac proa ww hull with a daggerboard (most of them) and less than Jzerro's without it's daggerboard. Of course, most of these improvements could be applied to improving a Pacific proa, which is how harrys began. Polynesan windward hulls were solid logs with pointy ends. Very draggy. Which is why they had fit, agile crew to keep them flying when they wanted to go fast. You build a couple of little proas, sail them unsuccessfully on a lake and then tell me I need more experience to understand harryproas which I have been playing with for 20 years, from 2' to 80'. Read about harrys sailing offshore (with side hung rudders) in post #54 in the proa experience thread, then tell us why you think the harryproa type is not suitable for offshore. If you send me pictures and description of your rudders, I will tell you where they are different to the ones that work. The video you reference shows a boat reaching across flat water on it's own which looks good, but is meaningless. See if you can find one of it shunting, sailing in chop, sleeping in the pod when waves are slapping it, the drag from the windward hull, running aground or gybing accidentally. These are far more relevant to proas than reaching in flat water, no matter how cool it looks. Non boat stuff: Ryan, Didn't think you would stay away. Waiting for the Skype details. Rob Z, Knew you wouldn't stay away. I don't want an apology from you, although Ryan probably will. All I asked is how you figure out boat speeds to 2 decimal places and how it makes sense to sail on a boat with a rig which is only "95% safe", when for less money, effort and wear and tear, you can have one which is 100% safe? That is some grudge! You made some statements which i considered wrong, I pointed out why, with facts, numbers and experience to support them, which you could not rebut as you have little or none of any of these to apply to harryproas. You then wait 6 months to try and dump a bucket of shit on me, which has every chance of landing on Ryan. Some advice: Don't post private emails on public forums. Not everyone is as relaxed about it as I am. Some get quite upset. If you want me to repeat something I have said in a private email, ask me about it on the public forum and I will do so. eg: Do I agree with Russ (Jzerro's designer) that the boat is only "fairly safe"? Do I think Ryan sailing round Cape Horn will result in more people sailing them who shouldn't? Samin, I'm not ignoring you, but there's not much I can say to someone who does not believe or discuss boat numbers. I will answer your post on the Bucket List thread next time I post there. I was unsure if you were trying to mend fences or were still the same dill you were on crew.org.nz Looks like you have answered that. Russ, You have the thickest skin of anyone i have ever come across. Nothing to say about being caught lying? Nothing about wrongly accusing me of lying? Pathetic. Must make potential clients feel really comfortable. All the haters, Thanks for the marketing advice. That people who dislike me and my boats as much as you guys do, yet are concerned that I may not be marketing them well means a lot to me. Nobody seriously considers threads like this as marketing once the shit starts flying, which is why Joe, Rob Z (both of whom fancy themselves as proa designers) and Russ, disrupt them at every opportunity. Fortunately, those who are smart enough to see that harryproas might have something to offer, are also smart enough to see through these tactics and contact me direct instead of posting here and getting abused.
  12. Smart move. Before you start it again next year, read what has been said this year. It will save us both a lot of effort. Get your loony mates to do the same. Happy to Skype. harryproarob. Email harryproa@gmail.com me a time and i will turn it on. GMT + 10. Maybe Russ as well, if he can control himself. Russ, see attached from Cruising World magazine, written by one of your shipmates. One of us is lying, and it's not me. An apology would be nice, but more likely is you will ignore it, then bring it up again next thread, same as you do with the 'sea miles' bullshit. I responded to that 2 weeks ago and you are already bringing it up again. http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=181739#entry5708463 Post#54 List the other "lies" you accuse me of but never detail and I will show you are wrong about them as well. If not, I will apologise and set the record straight. Read what I say rather than listen to Joe Oster's or your other cronies' interpretation of it. 20 years ago, I wrote you are a "consumate seaman, brilliant designer and builder extraordinaire" and that Jzerro was a great boat, with the drawbacks that you and others had pointed out. Kept saying it for 15 years until you started the hate. Now you come across as a bitter old man intent on defaming me at every opportunity because I have resolved these drawbacks. Not good for your reputation, your business or evidently, your mental health. As for your rants, see the previous sentence. If you can't handle having your own words used against you, then maybe you should get some help. As for Rob Z's post, see my reply above (post #142). My email was nothing to do with Ryan, everything to do with you saying "your proas are only fairly safe". Ryan needs you nursemaiding him about as much as people here need you writing the usual rubbish, then apologising for it. Why not tell us about Team Pure and Wild instead? Everybody else has decided to quit this time expired thread, yet you want to keep the battle going. Fine by me, As you know, I enjoy talking about boats. But maybe talk to Ryan about how he, his sponsors and his insurance company wants to handle the "fairly safe" stuff before you continue with it. See you on Skype. rob
  13. Amati, Sounds like it has potential, look forward to some more results. A steady breeze would help, but a windward hull would help more. I found that weight steering is not very precise and takes a lot more effort than a rudder, but rudders are a pain to design and build. Moving the rig is easy if it is well set up and the loads kept low. I would perservere with simplifying the coe movement as long as precise steering is not required. Rockerless hulls track better, are more responsive, and much easier to build, although they don't look so nice out of the water. Agree about a stiff mast, and unstayed. Use the log, a tapered one will bend more. I am especially interested in the mast to windward of the sail as it saves the weight and cost of a track and slides. Please keep us informed of progress. Below is an extract from the last of a string of emails between me and Rob D dated 04 June 2016. Draw your own conclusions.... I am out of this thread. "RobD, And to complete the picture, the displacement you gave me doesn't match the marketing, nor does the sail area, which from the sail plan is 47 m2 on a 15 m mast. So: BL 510/57 has a max flat water upwind speed of 16.32 knots BL 710/47 is 14.24 knots With an 80kg 18 metre high mast and una rig, BL will be under powered in light airs and pitch badly in choppy and rough water, especially light air slop. I can't tell you how much that will reduce the speed on these figures and it depends on relative sea state as well. But if you were to do something similar to the M 32 cat ( 18.80 knots max upwind) http://m32x.com/the-m32/ Stayed, 710 kg with 47m2 main and 42m2 gennaker /screecher on a 15m, 40 kg lighter mast, BL might do 19.56 knots max upwind and pitch nowhere near as badly. All stayed boats are not coffins and a stayed Proa still has 95% of the safety of a cantilever masted Proa. A big price to pay for 5% extra safety. You pay your money and take your choice. RobZ On 3 Jun 2016, at 10:50 PM, Rob Denney <harryproa@gmail.com> wrote: P&W is just another nail in the wait to lee, stayed mast, podded proa coffin. Next instalment will be Ryan coming to grief in Jzerro. Or, worse, succeeding so everybody thinks they can sail them offshore....." 2 decimal places of accuracy, but no indication of how you arrived at it, which makes it meaningless. Your comments on pitching and light air speed are based on numbers which are wrong. BL as built weighs 500 kgs/1,100 lbs, has a designed sail area of 57 sqm/600 sq', which may or may not be final. So far, 2 of the 3 6m/20' telescoping mast sections have been used, along with the sail area (21 sqm/230 sq') above the deep reef. Mast sections weigh 15 and 12 kgs/33 and 26lbs. New performance numbers based on this would be handy, if we know how they are generated. Nothing conclusive about the performance so far, but the rig, rudders and overall idea work ok so far. "OK" is not as good as "well", but it does include reaching as well as up and down wind. ;-) Videos and photos are awful so I am keeping them to myself for the time being. Should have some better ones after easter. "Stayed rigs are 95% as safe as unstayed ones" is another statement which needs support. How was this number, and concept, arrived at? Actual numbers is one of the things missing from proa threads. Why leave? Readers will assume you are simply flinging mud in the hope that some will stick. Ryan, As usual, when someone asks you some hard questions about your post or your boat, you resort to sarcasm or personal abuse and ignore the questions (post #136). This and threatening to leave the thread to avoid answering questions happens so often with you weight to leeward guys, I think it deserves a name. Withdrawing After Niggly Questions perhaps. Any suggestions for a name for those who do it? How do you shunt the other headsails? Presumably the way I described. Saying you don't do this with the jib as you carry 2 of them is correcct, but not the full story. Are the costs and weights correct? If so, do you agree it is an expensive and heavy solution. How often is "quite often" in terms of hull flying? Presumably not as often as you would like us to think, particularly offshore. How do you set the hull flying up for offshore sailing under autopilot? Presumably water borne and you put up with the banging and slamming. On a reach. ........................... Me "depending on your failure to support my ideas" is a total misrepresentation of what Mr "accurate to 2 decimal places" claims I wrote. Since I read Russ in Wooden Boat magazine explaining that his proas are only "fairly safe" I have been trying to make proas safer and easier to sail, with considerable success. You succeeding will encourage people who shouldn't to sail offshore in them. As Russ did back then, I think this is a bad thing (not sure if he still does). I don't think it is bad enough to embarrass you and make it a big deal on a public forum, but bad enough to mention it in a private email to someone who plans to sail a similar boat in the southern ocean. If you want to make it into a big deal, go right ahead. The publicity might help your fund raising. Or not. A sensible approach would have been to tell Rob Z he was out of order posting private emails and ask him to delete it. You guys are so keen to shoot the messenger (me) you miss out on the message and the broad picture. "shrouds, sail changes etc are common on most boats" because they are safe(ish). On proas, shrouds/stays are unsafe as the narrow staying angle, forestays and lowers mean a strong wind accidental gybe or caught aback "blows the stick away" (Russ's words, not mine. Again, you are shooting the messenger). Unlike "most boats" the jib has to be taken from end to end on a proa, which is unsafe and slow. You have obviously figured this out for yourself, which is why you are going for the expensive, heavy option of 2 sails and two furlers. Why give me a hard time for pointing it out? Defending the indefensible is a hiding to nothing. It is why these stupid arguments go on and on. The rest of your post #140 is as inane and irrelevant as your post #136, so I have ignored them. Joe/Proa sailor, Couldn't do it, huh? I saw your post criticising Rob Z's posting of private mails and almost saying I was wronged just before you deleted it. A triumph of personal dislike over your concern for privacy on the web. (sarcasm font on) I bet you're proud of yourself. (sarcasm font off).
  14. You bet! I got it so bad that I built a canting rig for my 12m/40' proa. Still getting the bugs out of the rest of it, but will try the canting "soon". Foiling Optimist: There are enough proas built and sailing to know what works and what doesn't. I have been building them for 20 years, still get abused every time I post (down to one or two people, from a high of about 20, so things are improving), so building does not seem to prevent the crazies. Not everyone who reads the threads thinks they are a waste. The interested people contact me direct to avoid the abuse and idiocy.
  15. What a peculiar thing to say. I certainly don't "know that Bucket List could be up to 3 knots average speed faster with a stayed rig". Pretty sure no one else does, either. Or of any calculation that would show this. Or of any actual boats that would prove it. However, it would be interesting to see your calculations/reasons, so please post them. With this degree of accuracy and certainty, you should enter the How Fast will Bucket List Go competition http://harryproa.com/?p=1837and win yourself a day sailing/racing/hooning/measuring it or $500. The Bucket List requirements were for an idiot proof boat (we pay for any non collision damage), that is low cost to build and charter, low maintenance, assembled/disassembled by two people in a couple of hours, easily sailed solo by ordinary sailors in open or confined spaces and 4 of which can fit in a container. Fast was not essential, but is pretty certain given the weight and sail area. Adding a stayed rig would make every requirement unachievable. It would not be idiot proof. Ask Ryan to gybe Jzerro accidentally in 25 knots of breeze under full sail to show you why. It would not be low cost. See below on headsail costs alone as a percentage of overall cost. Stayed rigs require a lot of maintenance which makes chartering expensive. You might get 2 stayed rig 40'ters in a container, no way would you get 4. They would weigh more. The lee hull needs to be higher and wider at the bows, wider amidships for staying and sheeting angles and much stronger to resist the loads. They also need extra headsails and winches, plus the weight of rigging, attachments and required beefing up. Headsails in confined spaces are time consuming to shunt, limit visibility and regularly require one of the crew to leave the safety of the tramp. It takes longer to tighten a rigging screw or tie off an adjuster than it does to insert an unstayed mast. Then the stayed rig needs to be tuned and checked regularly. Unstayed is insert and forget it. I am happy to let anyone sail my 25' version of BL, and once I get the bugs out, the full size one as well. As long as they don't hit anything, they are fine. A stayed rig would not survive the first shunt unless the operator knew what he was doing. A pure race version of Bucket List would be a very different boat. Lighter, more rm, bigger rig, less windage, lower, narrower hulls. A stayed rig may be the "optimal way to carry the most sail". It does not mean that these boats are as low cost, fast, simple to build or as easy to sail as they could be. You can either follow the herd, add complexity, weight and cost to your boat or work the spiral the other way, which is what I prefer. Which option is "stupid" is open to debate. Raz'r, In my experience, unstayed una rigs on proas work well if the boat is light and the balance is correct ie, no daggerboards in the ww hull, a windward hull that is designed to carry it's load and rockerless hulls with large rudders at 25 and 75% of the length. As the boats get bigger/heavier, an unstayed schooner rig works better. DDW, Could not agree more, particularly about the "mootness" of the discussion. The weight savings of an unstayed rig are not as important to me as the ease of use, lack of maintenance and low cost. Ryan, I am sure you have the best technology available, I question whether it makes your boat simple, safe, cheap, light and easy to use These are the design requirements for harryproas and most people who have to buy their own boats. 2 Colligo furlers at $3,000 each, pus 2 jibs, sheets, tracks, halyards, winches, forestays etc at $4,000 each (?) is $14,000, 28% of the total cost of a pro built Bucket List, over 70% of what the prototype has cost me. Double the cost of my entire rig. Each sail, furler, sheets, halyards, winches, track, etc weighs what? 25 kgs? 50 kgs total, which is 10% of Bucket List's weight, 3% of Jzerros. And this weight is either high up or on the ends of the boat. Jibs on proas still don't make sense to me. Nor do spinnakers if they are lowered, moved to the other end and rehoisted each time you gybe. And you didn't explain how you shunt the other headsails. Do these also have furlers, or are there 2 of each, or do you take them from end to end each shunt? You are totally wrong about Bucket List's anti capsize fuse. Sailing ability prevents Bucket List capsizing (crew to windward, ease the single, lightly loaded sheet or luff up/bear away). The fuse can be set at whatever angle of heel/pitch is required and is a last resort. Bucket List (racing) is sailed with the hull flying all the time, except in very light air. It is not meant to be autopiloted. Bucket List (cruising), is sailed with the ww hull firmly in the water at all times and the sail reefed or eased accordingly. When you say you "fly the hull quite a lot" do you mean that you set it up on autopilot with the hull just flying? So any increase in wind strength will cause the boat to heel over and submerge the pod. Any lull and it sinks into the water. How is this fast? How does a safety pod prevent a pitch pole, which is how many lightweight multis capsize? Have you ever used it in big breaking beam seas? These were the conditions older, short float tris tripped over the floats and capsized in. Your lee pod looks as prone to this as the tri floats. I have been saying your windward hull is too small for 20 years, so do not need to do any "research". I was just not sure why you were saying it "works well when fully ballasted" and "works well in real world testing", yet is being replaced. Now you say that "working well" does not apply to reaches. Is it any wonder I keep chasing you for details of your claims? Moving the coe back and forth is only necessary if it is out of whack with the clr or the boat balance changes dramatically. Lifting (large) rudders to move the clr is easier, cheaper and simpler. A single sail with coe aligned with the clr is simpler again. I tell you about the Solitarrys almost as often as I tell Russ about the rest of the harryproas! Once again. There were three pairs of hulls (1 x 15m, 1 x 7m) built. The first pair were built in 2 demo workshops to check out Derek Kelsall's brilliant KSS build method. This boat was sold. The owner has family and work issues so it has been backburnered. The second was for me to see whether harry hull shapes would allow KSS to be simplified. They did and lead to Intelligent Infusion, which is one of the reasons we can build Bucket List for $50,000 and the C60 cruiser for $3-400,000. The windward hull of this boat is the cruising hull of Bucket List. The other hull is in storage. The third set of hulls (and beams) were professionally built. It has a kite rig. I did not finish either of the first 2 boats for similar reasons to yours when you did not build, much less sail around Cape Horn in your 32' proa. The difference is that I don't mention it every time I post to try and make you look bad. Telling me to get experience on harryproas to find out that they are as bad as you say they are is funny, given that you have neither sailed nor seen one. On the other hand, I am pretty sure I have sailed more stayed rig and/or weight to leeward proas than you have. Not as far, but far enough to identify their faults and correct them. It is good to see you are addressing some of these faults, hopefully you are smart enough to address the rest before your voyage begins. Commenting on my lack of boat building skills while trying to get other people to pay for your boat says more about your shortcomings than it does about mine.