harryproa

Members
  • Content count

    657
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

13 Whiner

About harryproa

  • Rank
    Anarchist

Recent Profile Visitors

6,101 profile views
  1. harryproa

    Kleen Breeze

    For the third time: There are a couple of shunts in the video mentioned above https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wftyqI2aJlo&t=3s At 13.00 minutes it shows an 8 second shunt in 20 knots and a couple of longer ones earlier on. The longer ones are not pretty, (impaired, first time crew) but do show some of the advantages of shunting. ie you can take as long as you like, reverse it at at any time, does not require much crew coordination and does not run the risk of getting in irons (upwind) or surfing down waves with the boom slamming across and possible broaching (downwind in decent breeze). Nor are there any potential "zone of death" issues during bear aways, although this is a function of the unstayed rig rather than the proa format. Let me know what you think.
  2. harryproa

    Kleen Breeze

    Nothing from a drone, sorry. Not that there would be much to see. The boom(s) swing from one end to the other, the boat takes off in the opposite direction, while luffing up onto the new course. Same as a twin tip kite board. There is an animation at http://harryproa.com/?p=1910 On the earlier boats, the rudders rotated through 180 degrees as well as the rig. These days we are using Tom Speer's proa sections http://www.basiliscus.com/ProaSections/ProaIndex.html which work in both directions. Consequently, the rudders only rotate 20-30 degrees during a shunt. As the rudders are fore and aft the boat luffs far quicker than a conventional multi. On the schooner rigs, this is helped by trimming the aft sail first during a tack shunt and the fore sail first for a gybe shunt. There are a couple of shunts in the video mentioned above https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wftyqI2aJlo&t=3s At 13.00 minutes it shows an 8 second shunt in 20 knots and a couple of longer ones earlier on. The longer ones are not pretty, (impaired, first time crew) but do show some of the advantages of shunting. ie you can take as long as you like, reverse it at at any time, does not require much crew coordination and does not run the risk of getting in irons (upwind) or surfing down waves with the boom slamming across and possible broaching (downwind in decent breeze). Nor are there any potential "zone of death" issues during bear aways, although this is a function of the unstayed rig rather than the proa format. Hope this helps.
  3. harryproa

    Kleen Breeze

    Solarbri, Hope it works out. Sailplane, Not sure what you mean by "meaningful". Harryproas are safer, easier to build and sail, faster and cost less than cats and tris. The following videos etc give meaning to these claims. A 3.5 ton $350,000, 50' cruiser sailing effortlessly at wind speed with no extras https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8chR6DAFjGA&t=254s in 10 and 15 knots of breeze under main and jib. It also shows the spray and drag from the first generation bows and rudder mounts. Both are much cleaner on the latest versions, eg http://harryproa.com/?p=1747 none of which are sailing yet. Kleen Breeze sailing at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIFDforLxBY&t=4s . Not much breeze, but there is a description of sailing in 25 knots at http://harryproa.com/?p=562. 20 minutes of hands off steering without an autopilot is more meaningful than most multis. Gps track and footage of a home built and modified 60'ter, https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=1fsxnaYi-PM sailing at 17 knots (1 minute average) in 18-20 breeze, also with no extras. An explanation of how and why at http://harryproa.com/?p=129 and https://au.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/harryproa/info Look for posts by Rick Willoughby. The first 50 launched being sailed and shunted by a group of sight impaired first time sailors in Holland, something it has been doing for 10 years. At 13.00 minutes it shows an 8 second shunt in 20 knots and a couple of longer ones earlier on. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wftyqI2aJlo&t=3s Also with first gen rudders and bows. A home built 25'ter being comfortably cruised up and down the rugged, windy West Australian coast, solo. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cP2cYwi-f2I A step on the way to a foiling version https://vimeo.com/252480285 and a crude self righting model https://vimeo.com/257852827 A folding harry https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xVNGXqGPtE in New Zealand. No video, but a description of an overloaded 40'ter with neophyte crew weathering a 45 knot gale while crossing from Australia to New Zealand at http://harryproa.com/?p=1759 There are a bunch of build photos, costings, explanations and other boats at www.harryproa.com and a pretty comprehensive list of all the failures, screw ups, ideas and thinking that lead us to where we are now at https://au.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/harryproa/info If that is not enough, ask me specific questions and I will do my best to answer them.
  4. harryproa

    R2AK 2018

    I don't think you are being harsh, just selective. There are a couple of dozen videos of harrys sailing and steering perfectly well in a variety of conditions. None of the harryproas i have sailed on have had this problem. Nor have any that you or Sidecar have sailed on. ;-) If it did happen, it would be a pretty easy fix, either by adding more jib/removing mainsail, recutting the main to provide a more open leech, or short term, bending the mast to do so. A topping lift is a very powerful control on an unstayed mast if you want to fiddle with the power and balance. Worst case, simply lift the front rudder until the boat balances. Blind Date (the first cruising harry launched) still has positive sail balance with a reef in the main, so there is scope for a bigger jib. The latest harrys are schooner rigs (to better use the lee hull space), so it is even less of a problem. A 'good system for steering proas' works in both directions and kicks up when it hits something. One that doesn't might look better, but is more dangerous, and in a race like R2AK, slower if you do not sail at night because you are worried about hitting logs with fixed rudders and daggerboards. How many times did the boats with "good systems for steering proas" run aground or into a log at 15+ knots? What did/would the rudders, daggerboard and cases look like afterwards? Rick is not only a pedal (and hydro, VPP, electric motor and several other disciplines) authority, he has spent a lot of time on and made some changes to a home built and designed harryproa. You can read his thoughts on them at http://harryproa.com/?p=129 and http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/harryproa/ I did not introduce harryproas to this thread, only clarified what others said about them. Now you are moaning about thread drift while demanding (for the umpteenth time) I explain about harryproas offshore performance. For anyone interested, one of the many times I responded to this nonsense is in post 141 on the Multihulls Anarchy Gitana foiling thread. As for "making war", this was post #404 on the M A Caribbean 600 thread, about Russ' incessant trolling: "FFS (Russell) ... why don’t you start a fucking thread titled “Old School Sailing Gear-open discussion. Everyone except Rob Denney may participate”. That should help you feel better. Or maybe a thread titled, 'I can’t fucking stand Rob Denney-who’s with me? Because, lord knows, it would be terrible to have discussions, theories, ideas, etc, thrown out there about multihull capsizes, the why’s, the what’s, and the what if’s, in a thread about a race where a notorious Catamaran flipped. " end quote People who want to know why Russ trolls me can read chapter 45 of Gary Baigent's (Groucho Marx on these forums) excellent book http://www.coolmobility.com.au/Yacht/LightBrigade.pdf It takes arrogance to tell people where or what they should post. It takes a lot more to boast about doing things you are "not proud of".
  5. harryproa

    R2AK 2018

    The rudders on Blind Date in Rick's photo were designed and built by her ex paid skipper, with little or no input from harryproa. They are, by design, much stronger and heavier than they need to be. A big part of their bulk comes from the need to kick up in either direction in the event of a grounding, which is common where they sail in Holland and would appear to be a no brainer in the R2AK. Two large rudders at about 25% and 75% of the length and no daggerboards works well on all the harrys that have them, for less drag, complexity and cost than smaller rudders and daggerboards Attaching them is difficult, but everyone we do is lighter and more streamlined than the previous one. Daggerboard in the windward hull and small rudders set in from the ends of the boat would appear to be the worst of both world's. I look forward to hearing how they work.. What were the conditions when Sidecar sailed best with the front rudder? We have been doing (and talking about) this on harrys for at least 10 years. It is the obvious way to steer upwind. Hardly novel or not "obvious" . Bucket List steered/steers perfectly well in the limited sailing we did before fitting the foils. Please stop commenting about it as if you had sailed, seen or knew anything about it, when you haven't, haven't and don't.
  6. harryproa

    Caribbean 600

    Paraphrasing Post #461 "Wow, I couldn't have said it better, the science and real life experience is good and I couldn't agree more. I like unstayed masts, they just make sense on multihulls (and monhulls) if you want fast, low cost, low maintenance, easy sailing." Too true, but it does not need to be complex, nor does it need a big budget. I built the 3 x 6m/20' tubes for the unstayed rig on Bucket List for less than 2 grand's worth of materials and 40m of 4mm dyneema. Will get back to it when the more interesting jobs (sailing cargo proas, electric ferries and foiling) are done. Dcn An unstayed mast is a lever sticking out the top of the hull; a keel is a lever sticking out the bottom. When the boat is heeled to 90 degrees, both see similar loads, yet no one puts stays on keels. Canting keels are an even better example. A couple of stays and you could eliminate most of the mounting, the hydraulic controls and the engine and fuel required to operate it. None of the mega budget projects do so. I am pretty sure this is for the same reasons stayed masts don't make sense: Drag and complexity. Sidecar, Boat looks nice, sorry to hear about your ill health and finances. Spending time making experimental boats look nice is pretty pointless as i) the dust and chemicals are expensive and bad for you ii) the time and money is better spent sailing and trying stuff and iii) having done all that work, there is a reluctance to change something that isn't working. I agree with HeB that your mast section looks too light to be supporting the compression loads of two loose luffed sails, regardless of what Skene says. Based on your weights for unstayed proa masts, which are heavier than comparable ones we have designed and built, I also agree with DDW about your engineering. Could you please stop talking about Bucket List as though you know about it. You have neither seen nor sailed it and your understanding of how it works and why it was designed appears to be non existent. Your theories about it's Base Speed are, as i said when you posted them, flawed.
  7. harryproa

    Brisbane to Gladstone 2018 only

    If the shafts were engineered correctly, it would not make any difference what they were made of. I suspect the problem was laying up carbon over a mandrel. This works well if the fibres are wrapped tightly(ie, filament wrapped with a lot of drag on the winder). If they aren't and pressure is then applied (via vac bag or heat shrink tape), the fibres that are not running lengthwise are forced to conform to a smaller radius and kink. For masts, this is not a huge deal as they are not loaded in torsion. For rudders, not so much. The best way to make rudder shafts is in a one piece mould with a pressure bladder at high pressure. We usually use 6 atmospheres. This is high pressure, make sure the fastenings are up to it, and leave the room while the pressure is being applied. I had 20 cast iron G clamps on a 2m rudder section and when it got to pressure, one broke, with the rest following in rapid succession. Bits of clamp flying around the workshop was not pretty.
  8. harryproa

    Caribbean 600

    Given the amount of time, effort and money that has gone into perfecting stayed rigs, it is remarkable that unstayed ones are anywhere near them in performance. Unstayed rigs will be way ahead when we think outside the box and use their potential instead of playing by stayed rig solutions and rules. A place to start is telescoping masts. In the light, the sail area is up high where there is far more wind. Reefing lowers the windage and the weight so is not the negative it is on conventional rigs. The top mast can be very light as it is only used in light air, then lowered inside the next section. Reefing/unreefing on any point of sail without having to drag the sail down against the stays enables area changes to be done quickly. The sail shape is fixed and cut to suit the mast. Instead of controlling the shape with highly loaded controls (cunningham, sheet, outhaul and rig tension) the fixed shape sail is simply extended or reduced. Sail cloth is lighter and does not need to be high tech, battens are pre bent and rotate. Sail trim becomes: Are we flying a hull? No; extend the rig. Yes; think about reducing it. Another area where unstayed has advantages is the ability to eliminate tracks and cars by tieing the sail to the mast. This saves the weight and cost of tracks and cars in an area where weight is important, eliminates the lee side bubble and requires less sail shaping. A short flap on the opposite side to the sail to fair the windward side as well, allows a bigger diameter, lighter and stiffer mast while using far less sail cloth and battens than double sided sails. The result is similar to camber inducers and sock sails on moths and windsurfers, but without the hassle and limitations (hoisting/lowering). A telescoping rig with a faired leading edge provides more sail, upwind and down, at lower overall weight and windage than a sloop rig. And when the breeze increases, that area, weight and windage is easily reduced, along with the mast height. Merloe has a 30m high mast, carries 300 sq m upwind, 450 down and weighs 6.5 tons. If the mast was 30% back from the bows and 70% of the mast was extended the sail area would be 51m (luff) x 15m (boom length plus bowsprit length, but at the stern) x .8 (roach) = 611 sq m, more than twice as much upwind. The boat would be lighter overall, and could be sailed by 3 instead of 6 people with less deck gear and loads. If the mast was in 4 sections, the rig height and weight of the fully reefed mast would be about 12m. Less than half as high, with much less windage than the reefed stayed rig. The weight in the bow and a 15m boom might be a challenge on a boat designed for a stayed rig, in which case, two masts would be more managable. If "the name of the game is to carry as much sail area, with as much luff length as possible", there are better, cheaper, more reliable and easier ways to achieve it than stayed sloop rigs. The latest version has the sheave on the rotating arm. When it rotates, the sheet falls off and straightens out under the bridgedeck, so no snubber required. Sorry. .-) DDW, Thanks for the history lesson. Good to know harryproas have another 80 years or so to get popular. ;-) Solarbri, Thanks.
  9. harryproa

    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.
  10. harryproa

    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,
  11. harryproa

    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"?
  12. harryproa

    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.
  13. harryproa

    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.
  14. harryproa

    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.
  15. harryproa

    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.