• 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.  

harryproa

Members
  • Content count

    586
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About harryproa

  • Rank
    Anarchist

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0

Recent Profile Visitors

5,581 profile views
  1. Bucket List

    Not sure any of the cats you mention have 2 wand controlled foils to lee. And they all have their front foils more or less under the coe. I have no idea how often they fall off the foils in a gybe. Nor how much less likely we will be to do so with a front foil well ahead of the coe and wands on both foils, which is why I am building the boat. Aligning the hulls with the apparent wind would help, but is a long way down the development track. It would need 2 sets of steering, one for the rudders, one for the hulls. On BL the aim is to foil, then work on the shunts. Initially it will not have a foil under the windward hull. I am pretty sure I will not have to deliberately screw up a shunt to find out what happens!
  2. Bucket List

    Not sure what you mean b y "empirical data". The moths do crash, until the sailors know how to control them. Compared to BL, they have operator controlled rear foils, rely a lot on crew weight movement and have the front foil below the centre of effort of the rig, all of which makes them more twitchy, I think. And probably faster. The weight comes from supporting the post around which the hulls (particulalry the windward one with the beam set up and rig arrangement that we currently have) rotate and the steering loads when the boat is not foiling. If the set up we plan does not work, then steering the hulls has potential. Thanks. Smith's ideas are cool, and have something in common with BL, but are quite different when it comes to foiling shunts, foiling arrangement and rig. The buoyant hydrofoils are potentially great, but I could not bring myself to build such minimal volume floats. The original drawings had 3m x 300 x 300 floats. This has grown to 3.5 x 450 high x 350 wide, and they still look pretty small.
  3. Bucket List

    Agree about the sideways jerk, but the plan is to not come off the foils at speed. No (theoretical) reason why it should, but there may be some practical ones, which we will discover on BL. I once built a 12m cat with hulls which yawed independantly and making it work on BL would be a big job. And heavy. Hopefully, it won't be required. Albatross, Ta.
  4. Bucket List

    Different folks, different strokes. I like to try new stuff. Once I see it will work, I tend to move on to something else, particularly when that is better/more interesting than the old stuff. I can put x dollars and y hours into an experimental boat to prove it works. I can then spend 10 times as much of each to get it looking good and working perfectly and sell it for what the materials cost if I am lucky. The overheads and labour, most of which is hard work turning filler into dust and poisoning yourself with exotic paints, is unpaid. Or, I can demonstrate it works, then sell it for a pittance, store it "just in case", give it away or take it to the tip and save myself a truck load of labour. The flattery that comes with well finished boats and winning races is not worth the time involved if all you want to do is see if something works. For me, it is about making new ideas work, especially if I am going to sell plans including them. I sailed BL enough to know it would fulfill it's design requirements (4 boats in a container, shipped around the world to regattas for low cost charter racing). However, there was no interest in setting it up as a business so I moved on. Something I did not include in the original reasons for throwing in the towel/giving up/spitting the dummy/whatever derogatory term you want to use on BL is that I need to hire a shed (expensive round here) and slip and truck the boat back and forth. BL Foiling can be taken apart on the beach, carried across the road and put in the garage. Again, time and money. Raz'r, There was nothing on the Bucket List concept that we had not already tried apart from the righting, which has now been superceded. The problem was with the business model, not the boat. There are brief, unedifying videos of the first 2 sails at http://harryproa.com/?p=424#more-424 I agree there are "plenty of foilers", but foiling shunting 40'ters that weigh 350 kgs/770 lbs with telescoping rigs are a bit less common, don't you think? If you really are "interested in Bucket List" (post 164) and think "refining it" with your (implied) "time and money" "would be great" (169), I am happy to help you do so. Build one and race it to it's potential and I will refund your plans cost and give you 10% of any future plans sold. Overlay, Better. You are now reading what is written. Next step is to stop reading the press releases and read the tender document http://tender.volvooceanrace.com, which specifies a multihull, does not mention catamarans at all. The tender requirement was for a futuristic, fast, challenging, cost effective, easily rigged and transported, rightable, VIP suitable, out of the box, foiling multihull with potential for other classes and a low carbon footprint. The Volvo Proa solutions are at http://harryproa.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/…/volvoproa.pdf. The cat or tri that meets them better will be an interesting machine. The announcement is next week.
  5. Proa

    Probably Hocus Pocus, designed and built by the clever guy who put Cat 2 Fold together. We are helping him replace his in hull rudders with kick up versions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBhnGwcrSyw He has apparently replaced his masts with larger unstayed ones since this video was taken. Incicdentally, Cat 2 Fold is for sale at a very good price, the owner has fallen in love with Kleen Breeze, the 20m harryproa recently launched in Portugal. http://harryproa.com/?p=562#more-562
  6. Bucket List

    Nothing wrong with Bucket List apart from the items in my post. The Volvo Proa ideas are novel so more interesting to spend my time and money on. Whaddami? A wimp. 40 years ago, I delivered a 12m cat from UK to Trinidad, leaving the UK in December. The crew nicknamed me 'Penguin' as I did not wear shoes or boots when sailing. Now, I don't enjoy working on boats when it is less than 20C so for a couple of months each year, I don't. Overlay, Close? No. Read the lines I write instead of putting what you want to see between them.
  7. Bucket List

    You bet! It will be tried with a kite before a conventional rig as it is so much simpler/cheaper to set up. We are also involved with Kitetik http://harryproa.com/?p=2052#more-2052, a 15m/50' kite powered harryproa which will have foils fitted this summer. Kitetik is a development of the experiments we did in Elementarry https://vimeo.com/127926604
  8. VOR 2019-2020

    Bucket List and the Volvo Proa are totally unrelated, so why not? Included in our proposal was building a half size model to prove the concept. This would have cost Volvo 25,000€ in a program that budgeted 7.5 million Euros for 10 boats and would have been sailing when the winner was announced. We were not short listed, so I am using Bucket List as the proof of concept. If/when it works, we will sell plans for home and pro builders.
  9. VOR 2019-2020

    Not sure if this was too far "out of the box" or not enough. Regardless, it was not short listed for the Inshore foiling multihull. http://harryproa.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/…/volvoproa.pdf
  10. Bucket List

  11. Sailrocket 3 - The Offshore version

    Agreed. An example, which ties in with your comments about max sail area and stability is the other Beiker proa, Team Pure and Wild, which was actually built and raced, as opposed to Jester 2 which was neither. Perhaps Rob Z could calculate TPW's Base Speed and compare it with what was actually achieved? Rob Z, I have indeed been on other threads where you have used this formula, but never considered it important or relevant enough to test it with real boat numbers. When i did, (see previous posts), it appears to be flawed. As well as examples of unbuilt boats that agree with your formula (perhaps because the VPP uses the same inputs?), maybe you could comment on the real world examples i gave above, where it doesn't? Do you know the parameters of the Jester 2 VPP? ie, hull flying or not, water ballast or not, crew location, sail plan, etc. These are just some of the elements that make proa speed (and behaviour) predictions a difficult task. What are the errors in the Shuttleworth and Bethwaite formulae?
  12. A Cat Worlds Sopot

    I enjoy your posts and find them educational. Please keep them coming. rob
  13. Sailrocket 3 - The Offshore version

    Cool. Bit heavier than a 25' harry, but with more "accommodation". When is the first sail? Scaling this hull so that it was 40m long but only as wide and high as necessary would be lighter than the Ultimes main hull, which seem to be winding the design spiral towards heavier and more powerful rather than lighter and more easily driven. Let's hope it does not have the same result as the ORMA's which were also length limited. Thanks for the reference. No need to be snarky. That formula was devised by the very clever Richard Boehmer to relate the race results of a group of boats in the 80's and 90's, none of which were longer than 50' and including cruisers and racers, good sailors and bad. In 2001 he wrote (MHML) that it did not apply to ORMA 60 type multis. Consequently, I agree with you. In regards to 40m tris and proas, it is not rocket science. Nor is it physics, basic or otherwise. Nor is it of much use comparing the two. It is similar to the formula used by both Texel and the MYCQ, both of which are pretty good for similar boats, but not so hot when they get dissimilar. Given the unlikeliness of the samples i gave in my previous posts, I would treat it with care. Unless you think that the samples I gave are reasonable results? A 5m extension of the waterline on a 40m tri would knock 2 days off the RTW record? A 3 person Tornado will only be 6% slower than a 2 person? Another one: What is the "basic physics" explaining this year's Transpac where the ORMA 60' beat the MOD 70's? Same sail area and crew ability, the 60 is15% shorter. "Roughly double the increase in Base Speed by going for (say 10% extra) length as opposed to saving (say 10%) weight") implies it would have to be more than 30% lighter to justify being quicker? Boats which are as different as 40m tris and proas do not answer to simple formulae, at least not to any that are known at present. Part of this is the lack of experimental evidence to test them with.
  14. Sailrocket 3 - The Offshore version

    It would get hammered, partly due to all the development that has gone into maxi tris compared to maxi proas, partly due to it being grossly overweight. If Bank Pop is 23T with 720 sq m sail, and you removed one of the floats, 75% of the main hull (ie 10m instead of 40 and 2 kgs per sq m instead of 8(?)), made the daggerboards steerable so you didn't need the rudders and kept boa the same, it would weigh less than 10T. To get the same power to weight (Bruce Number) as BP (2.4), the proa would need 425 sqm of sail. The proa would still get hammered on the development front, but might be faster in some conditions due to lower wetted surface and drag, easier to handle rig, etc. If you were "unconstrained", the weight could be appreciably less. Are you still in SIngapore? Gary, Looks good. Frog, I presume? What does it weigh? Rob Z, What is "Base (average) Speed"? According to your numbers (below) reducing the weight by 22% ((23-18)/23) results in a speed gain of 6% (31.3-29.4)/29.4). Does this mean a Tornado cat with 2 x 70 kgs crew (300 kgs, 22% lighter) will be 6% faster than one with 3 crew (380 kgs) ie, if the 3 crew sail at 10 knots, the 2 crew will sail at 10.6? And increasing the length by 50% ((60-40)/40) results in a speed gain of 22% ((36-29.4)/29.4). In which case a 30'ter wiil sail 22% faster than a 20'ter, weight and sail area being the same? Seems to give an unduly high benefit to length and unduly low benefit to weight savings. If 50% longer is 22% faster, is it reasonable to assume 12.5% ((45-40)/40) will be 5.5% faster? In a 40 day trip round the planet, that would make the 45m boat over 2 days quicker than the 40m. Well "worth the effort", I think.
  15. Race Replays

    Thanks. Hope you can keep it up until the end.