albatross

Rapido 60' Trimaran, Morelli and Melvin design, launched!

Recommended Posts

Paul,

3 questions on the Rapido:

Is the rudder retractable? (For gunkholing, reefs,etc.)

Why such a short traveller? Why not a longer semi circular one to get better sail control? 

For cruising one would need to be able to load a lot of stuff on board. How would you compare her loading sensitivity to a cat of similar size, cats being notoriously sensitive to overloading.

Also congrats on the Rapido 50 project, can't wait to see developments on this.

Cheers,

Ben.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/18/2017 at 7:37 PM, Ben said:

Paul,

3 questions on the Rapido:

Is the rudder retractable? (For gunkholing, reefs,etc.)

Why such a short traveller? Why not a longer semi circular one to get better sail control? 

For cruising one would need to be able to load a lot of stuff on board. How would you compare her loading sensitivity to a cat of similar size, cats being notoriously sensitive to overloading.

Also congrats on the Rapido 50 project, can't wait to see developments on this.

Cheers,

Ben.

Hi Ben ,

Yes both the rudder and dagger boards are retractable so the minimum draft is around 750 mm ( 2 1/2 feet )

Traveler is fine the way it is as the apparent wind is usually so high that we never feel the need to use more traveler track than we have  !

The number 1 boat has been loaded up and lived on for months on end and if anything we have too much storage space . It is a 60 foot boat and it easily carries a good cruising load for 6 people for extended periods of time with negligible effect on it's performance .

If any one who is in Europe wants to see and test sail Rapido Number 1 , now is the time ! 

It is currently in Cannes for a couple of weeks and then will be heading south for a while before returning for the boat show .

It will be back  and will be displayed  Cannes Yachting Festival in September .

Send me a message and I can make a inspection happen .

 

Regards Paul

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I looked the boat over at the Auckland boat show mostly because the owner is an acquaintance of mine. It is a nice boat and well thought out. This boat would be a bit to big for the wife and I to cruise comfortably (we are 60+ with loads of experience).  I liked the boat because it wasn't loaded with a bunch of crap you don't need. I think the 50 would be much better size for us. I understand it is roughly about two million Kiwi for this boat. Operating, maintenance  and running cost would be about 10% of the cost of a boat to keep well maintained a year so two hundred thousand a year? I better win the lottery for this one or work harder. If it was Paul on the boat he was very nice to talk with. Cheers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/4/2016 at 6:04 PM, ProaSailor said:

 

Impressive!

 

 

God I miss Boeing Surplus.  They used to sell Prepreg Spectra by the pound...:lol:

Good luck with the boat, Paul- it's a fine madness!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boeing Surplus? Did you say "Boeing Surplus"?. A lot of northwest multihulls were built with the leftovers from airplanes and missles. Those were exciting times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 11 pound hollow Windsurfer hull that eventually leaked like a sieve!  I glued 3 old refrigerators together as a clave-

the titanium mast!

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes - the 60 was all locked up / closed up when I was at the Auckland Show Sunday am. Time restrictions prevented a return visit. Looks great!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I visited it at the Auckland Boat show. Rig and sails were impressive, and the general layout was well thought out, but the finishing was not up to the standard you would expect on a boat costing northwards of a million dollars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Jordan Series Drogue is in transit to Spain for "Rapido".

Dyneema 12 strand bridle legs and first section of drogue.

156 cones.  Aft section 84 cones on half inch double braid polyester....saves some $.

Aft section weighs 19.5 lbs. Drogue and bridle legs weigh 36.5 lbs in storage bag,  without weight for the tail end. 

Cones are 6.5 oz Dacron.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/19/2017 at 4:33 AM, Paul Koch said:

In case anyone is interested Rapido is about to start the ARC in the multihull class ! Follow us on Yellow Brick tracker !

My gosh that is either a really slow boat or really interesting routing.  As of this date and after talking about how you could take on and beat Gunboats when you get across, you are getting crushed by virtually every multihull including a TS 42 and some Outremers, and even some monohulls.  Ouchie, broken, or in cruising mode (so why race)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rasputin22 said:

Dragonfly 25 in Open Class will be interesting to compare.

A 25 would definitely be very interesting, but I can only find the Dragonfly 35 Merlin - ten feet and a few tons larger... 

Paul 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah you right Tool! Need to get my eyes checked. I think the 35 would be a nice ride for this race. I have done the Two-Star on a far simpler 35' tri and the Dragonfly would be palatial by comparison. 

Image result for dragonfly 35 ultimate for sale

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nav bet didn’t work. They went south (as did the Dragonfly) and hit a wind hole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, EarthBM said:

Nav bet didn’t work. They went south (as did the Dragonfly) and hit a wind hole.

And this is the challenge of judging a boat by a few race results only.... 

Fast boats still need a good crew and smart naviguessing.  Good crew and naviguessing can make even an 'average' boat look like a winner--especially when the competition messes up.

Over time, though, race results begin to speak more loudly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Veeger said:

And this is the challenge of judging a boat by a few race results only.... 

It is the reality of the "law of averages". Or the fable of the tortoise and hare if you like. On a cruising boat (and most racing boats) average passage speed combines good conditions with bad, good weather guessing with bad, etc. And average speed over the passage is dominated by the slow periods, not the fast ones. The result is that even boats capable of bursts of speed in ideal conditions, do not average much faster than more plodding boats over a longer period of time. It'll be interesting to see how this one plays out, when they hit more wind. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, DDW said:

It is the reality of the "law of averages". Or the fable of the tortoise and hare if you like. On a cruising boat (and most racing boats) average passage speed combines good conditions with bad, good weather guessing with bad, etc. And average speed over the passage is dominated by the slow periods, not the fast ones. The result is that even boats capable of bursts of speed in ideal conditions, do not average much faster than more plodding boats over a longer period of time. It'll be interesting to see how this one plays out, when they hit more wind. 

Still neck and neck with the Beneteau 60.  If they are going to race Rapido in this race as a marketing tool, they should be serious about it.  As a consumer, I like both the Beneteau 60 and the Rapido.  For an extra million, the Rapido is supposed to walk all over the Beneteau. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Poor weather routing.  Now in sixth place with an ETA six days behind the leader, TS 42 Guyader Gastronomie.  ZZZ...

 arc_rapido.thumb.jpg.70da4a7092880fd498ec81569c130f9c.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With what it looks like they are getting for wind, we may not learn much from this ARC. It's not suppose to be an upwind passage. Also with very light winds, you don't know how much the engines are being run until they post their results. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As fast as it seemed Rapido was doomed, things are heating up, and she may actually be poised to come out ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jzk said:

Rapido has retired.  Just when it was looking good.

Oh, that's bad.  "Diverting to Canary Islands"...  Did they ever exceed ten knots?

rapido_retired.png.d7566b1191d0099794eb05303e8c4c19.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kinda looks like the Pogo 40 is well positioned and about to shit on the rest of the fleet, if the wind arrows are to be believed.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RAPIDO 60

When the Rapido 60 trimaran first appeared, I figured it was some kind of a joke. The styling recalled an F27 from 20 years ago. I teased that they owed Ian royalties. It’s beam overall was just over 38’, which some of mine, and most modern 40’ + trimarans, equal.  My GS 60 beam overall, from 25 years ago, in E-glass, was 44.5’. Everybody knows that when you push a multi, wide is what keeps you right side up. So making it not wide had to be something to push onto the unsuspecting, right?

rapido60.jpg
Almost all the pictures I saw of them had the crazy camouflage paint so it was never clear what was going on. I figured that they were not serious and didn’t think much more about them.
It was just pointed out to me that the R60s don’t have continuous mainstrength beams. Blew me away. Followers of this over the years have seen the importance of continuous fibers, fiber orientation, co-curing of mission-critical parts, not forcing composites into sharp turns…..
And here is one design that seems to ignore all that. What gives?
And that explains the narrow overall beam. That’s the only way to keep the loads down, besides throwing carbon at the problem.

Again, I have always declared that with enough carbon and enough money, one can have almost anything designed. This seems to be a prime example.
If we assume 24,000 lbs sailing weight, and a 12’ cantilever of the beam, then hit it with a shock load on one of the beams. The moment at the root will be something like a quarter million foot pounds. If the bury is 3’, then the load to resist will be some 80,000 lbs.
No wonder it is so heavy. Yes, heavy. 20,000 lbs. lightship. It is all carbon, right? That carbon has some 5 to 7 times the modulus of E-glass. Compare to my GS60 at 13,000 lbs., as designed, in mostly E-glass.
Main point. You can’t beat a continuous D section for the most beam strength and stiffness, the least weight, and least cost to build.
And again, all boats inhabit a place on a continuum between a habitat and a vehicle.
The R60 seems a bit confused.  All the carbon tells me vehicle, but chopping up the lightest, strongest possible connecting beams to get more cabin space is right back to a 1960s Horstman; habitat.
None the less, I’m sure they will sell a lot of them. The owners can “Hey baby, I got a carbon boat.”
I prefer direct, simple solutions to magical ones.

 

The above from Kurt Hughes Blog.

Do we Know if the retirement was due to structural problems.

If their PR department works we may never know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt it was a structural problem. The boat has been sailed quite a bit and the weather they were in seemed more like becalmed than sporty. But if we are trotting out the conspiracy theories, how about they quit because they were behind and it wouldn't look good? This is always a risk in a highly hyped boat - when you put a satellite tracker on them they have been known to slow down quite a little bit. 

In any case, with the odd weather the whole fleet has run into, there may not be much performance information to salvage from this running. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, overlay said:

RAPIDO 60

When the Rapido 60 trimaran first appeared, I figured it was some kind of a joke. The styling recalled an F27 from 20 years ago. I teased that they owed Ian royalties. It’s beam overall was just over 38’, which some of mine, and most modern 40’ + trimarans, equal.  My GS 60 beam overall, from 25 years ago, in E-glass, was 44.5’. Everybody knows that when you push a multi, wide is what keeps you right side up. So making it not wide had to be something to push onto the unsuspecting, right?

rapido60.jpg
Almost all the pictures I saw of them had the crazy camouflage paint so it was never clear what was going on. I figured that they were not serious and didn’t think much more about them.
It was just pointed out to me that the R60s don’t have continuous mainstrength beams. Blew me away. Followers of this over the years have seen the importance of continuous fibers, fiber orientation, co-curing of mission-critical parts, not forcing composites into sharp turns…..
And here is one design that seems to ignore all that. What gives?
And that explains the narrow overall beam. That’s the only way to keep the loads down, besides throwing carbon at the problem.

Again, I have always declared that with enough carbon and enough money, one can have almost anything designed. This seems to be a prime example.
If we assume 24,000 lbs sailing weight, and a 12’ cantilever of the beam, then hit it with a shock load on one of the beams. The moment at the root will be something like a quarter million foot pounds. If the bury is 3’, then the load to resist will be some 80,000 lbs.
No wonder it is so heavy. Yes, heavy. 20,000 lbs. lightship. It is all carbon, right? That carbon has some 5 to 7 times the modulus of E-glass. Compare to my GS60 at 13,000 lbs., as designed, in mostly E-glass.
Main point. You can’t beat a continuous D section for the most beam strength and stiffness, the least weight, and least cost to build.
And again, all boats inhabit a place on a continuum between a habitat and a vehicle.
The R60 seems a bit confused.  All the carbon tells me vehicle, but chopping up the lightest, strongest possible connecting beams to get more cabin space is right back to a 1960s Horstman; habitat.
None the less, I’m sure they will sell a lot of them. The owners can “Hey baby, I got a carbon boat.”
I prefer direct, simple solutions to magical ones.

 

The above from Kurt Hughes Blog.

Do we Know if the retirement was due to structural problems.

If their PR department works we may never know.

So this is what Kurt Hughes has to say about this boat?   I would like to know if one of Kurt's boats has ever entered or placed well in an offshore race.

A designer disrespecting another designer's boats to make his own designs look good is too familiar on this forum. Kurt has done this since his beginning as a designer. I don't have a lot of respect for that type of marketing and I have one hell of a lot more resect for the designers of the Rapido 60 than I have for Kurt's opinion.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, DDW said:

Kinda looks like the Pogo 40 is well positioned and about to shit on the rest of the fleet, if the wind arrows are to be believed.....

Agreed, the Pogo 40 Talanta is in a powerful position to windward of the fleet.  This belongs in ARC 2017 thread?

pogo40.png.f5a7c9190913c49cff66ee795f1145aa.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Russell Brown said:

So this is what Kurt Hughes has to say about this boat?   I would like to know if one of Kurt's boats has ever entered or placed well in an offshore race.

A designer disrespecting another designer's boats to make his own designs look good is too familiar on this forum. Kurt has done this since his beginning as a designer. I don't have a lot of respect for that type of marketing and I have one hell of a lot more resect for the designers of the Rapido 60 than I have for Kurt's opinion.

In all fairness to Kurt, he didn’t post that here. Somebody else copied it from Kurt’s own blog. 

Me thinks he has the right to blabber on about his thoughts on anything in his blog. Including other designers boats, and what he sees wrong with them. 

Even though I find his thoughts valid and interesting, he’s not here actually participating in this discussion (that I know of).

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The practice of publicly denouncing someone's design work in an effort to further one's own agenda is morally wrong to me, especially when it comes from someone who has some things to answer for. Kurt's critique was very public, harsh, and was directed at a very innovative boat that was designed by a team that has more than a bit to be proud of. 

Second guessing design choices from Morelli & Melvin by Kurt Hughes is a bit over the top to me, especially the structural choices and weights for the Rapido 60.                       

I'm not going to say anything more on this subject here, but if Kurt Hughes wants to know why I have said what I have, tell him that I'll be happy to refresh his memory on a few things....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The abit special design for this tri - is that they designed it for be foldable like a Farrier - and I guess that explains some of the things - like narrow beam - and that the beams are not one structural piece. Also this is a fast cruiser not a racer.  

But anybody knows why they retire in the ARC?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Russell Brown said:

The practice of publicly denouncing someone's design work in an effort to further one's own agenda is morally wrong to me, especially when it comes from someone who has some things to answer for. Kurt's critique was very public, harsh, and was directed at a very innovative boat that was designed by a team that has more than a bit to be proud of. 

Second guessing design choices from Morelli & Melvin by Kurt Hughes is a bit over the top to me, especially the structural choices and weights for the Rapido 60.                       

I'm not going to say anything more on this subject here, but if Kurt Hughes wants to know why I have said what I have, tell him that I'll be happy to refresh his memory on a few things....

How is it morally wrong?  It may very well make him a duchebag, but how is it wrong?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Rapido FB page...

 

In an unfortunate turn of events, a message from Richard 

"About 9am on 25th with two reefs and stay sail in anticipation of the wind strengthening we were enjoying pleasant sailing at 9 knots speed and then an almighty  bang....mast snapped about 5m up! No one hurt, no panic ...cut it all away and sadly we bid farewell to the rig. Now motoring back to Las Palmas about 700nm away with 400 nm to go. Fortunately wind and sea with us which is  the opposite to the usual conditions at this time of year. Caught a small mahi mah!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well so far you have to hand it to the Outremer 64.  I don't even think it has a cored hull.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dismasted due to insufficient sail raised? Two reefs and staysail in what looks like maybe 18 knots of wind seems like very underpowered. 9 knots boatspeed would agree with that. I've seen multihulls dismast in conditions similar when the reef point is below the hounds which neccesitates using a spare halyard as a backstay to the masthead. The cantilevered mast panel above the hounds gets a surprising amount of loading from the leach loads and the compression of the battens which is not there when the headboard is at or lower than the mast hounds. That can lead to the mast inverting without the aforementioned 'temporary backstay' and if there are confused seas can cause unanticipated loads on the mast. The mention of staysail only would add to this effect. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Russell Brown said:

The practice of publicly denouncing someone's design work in an effort to further one's own agenda is morally wrong to me, especially when it comes from someone who has some things to answer for. Kurt's critique was very public, harsh, and was directed at a very innovative boat that was designed by a team that has more than a bit to be proud of. 

Second guessing design choices from Morelli & Melvin by Kurt Hughes is a bit over the top to me, especially the structural choices and weights for the Rapido 60.                       

I'm not going to say anything more on this subject here, but if Kurt Hughes wants to know why I have said what I have, tell him that I'll be happy to refresh his memory on a few things....

Plus 1. But ouchie on Rapido's sailing performance stacked up against other boats in the ARC, and on this latest set-back on keeping the mast intact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm kinda curious as to what Mr. Brown's actual beef might be with regards to the Kurt Hughes opinion offered from another source? Hughes suggests many issues from a technical standpoint and supports the process with rough estimates of the forces at work and the typical solutions one might see in the process. Mr. Brown, by comparison, only attacks the person voicing the opinion and offers no substantive technical references of his own. Apparently, the process to which Hughes was addressing, is an ad hominem one in Brown's eyes and he sees fit to retort with his own ad hominem version, while staying far away from any of his own technical, substantive suggestions to counter those made by Hughes.

The wild-eyed placard of a "morally wrong" claim is simply an opinion that, in this case, seems to be "Like that's just your opinion, man" if you will forgive me for the Dude reference in suggesting that Brown is less than potent in his assessment. So, what is it, Russ, that really bugs you about the opinions being suggested by Hughes? Can you form a response to the comments, singularly, that have to do with the technical observations and leave out the haughty name calling and ad hominem baloney? I would guess that you possess that kind of capacity, but it sure isn't showing in your posts.

I'm also wondering if you can answer the issues without, also, attacking me, personally?

The boat in question, has reportedly broken its mast and retired. All these suggestions that have been tossed on the deck, as it were, make one wonder what was really going on with the boat that it coughed-up its stick and swam back to the dock. Were any of the other boats experiencing mast breakdowns in similar conditions? Did the forces at work on the above-mentioned boat structure contribute to the demise? Perhaps Mr. Brown can also give us his learned feedback on these matters and bench race an answer for we unwashed masses?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I know that I can't take it back, but I wish that I'd held my tongue on this one. I don't think that my reaction to Kurt's critique of the Rapido 60 was any worse than his critique of the boat was though. If I reacted strongly, it wasn't without reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Chapped said:

I'm kinda curious as to what Mr. Brown's actual beef might be with regards to the Kurt Hughes opinion offered from another source? Hughes suggests many issues from a technical standpoint and supports the process with rough estimates of the forces at work and the typical solutions one might see in the process. Mr. Brown, by comparison, only attacks the person voicing the opinion and offers no substantive technical references of his own. Apparently, the process to which Hughes was addressing, is an ad hominem one in Brown's eyes and he sees fit to retort with his own ad hominem version, while staying far away from any of his own technical, substantive suggestions to counter those made by Hughes.

The wild-eyed placard of a "morally wrong" claim is simply an opinion that, in this case, seems to be "Like that's just your opinion, man" if you will forgive me for the Dude reference in suggesting that Brown is less than potent in his assessment. So, what is it, Russ, that really bugs you about the opinions being suggested by Hughes? Can you form a response to the comments, singularly, that have to do with the technical observations and leave out the haughty name calling and ad hominem baloney? I would guess that you possess that kind of capacity, but it sure isn't showing in your posts.

I'm also wondering if you can answer the issues without, also, attacking me, personally?

The boat in question, has reportedly broken its mast and retired. All these suggestions that have been tossed on the deck, as it were, make one wonder what was really going on with the boat that it coughed-up its stick and swam back to the dock. Were any of the other boats experiencing mast breakdowns in similar conditions? Did the forces at work on the above-mentioned boat structure contribute to the demise? Perhaps Mr. Brown can also give us his learned feedback on these matters and bench race an answer for we unwashed masses?

chapped ad hominem baloney.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Russell Brown said:

Okay, I know that I can't take it back, but I wish that I'd held my tongue on this one. I don't think that my reaction to Kurt's critique of the Rapido 60 was any worse than his critique of the boat was though. If I reacted strongly, it wasn't without reason.

He critiqued the boat based stating specific technical observations that seemed logical on their face.  You criticized him personally without stating reasons, but implying something bad.  A bit different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/24/2017 at 7:45 PM, Russell Brown said:

So this is what Kurt Hughes has to say about this boat?   I would like to know if one of Kurt's boats has ever entered or placed well in an offshore race.

A designer disrespecting another designer's boats to make his own designs look good is too familiar on this forum. Kurt has done this since his beginning as a designer. I don't have a lot of respect for that type of marketing and I have one hell of a lot more resect for the designers of the Rapido 60 than I have for Kurt's opinion.

Russell, Russell, Russell.
I almost guessed you had stock in Rapido.
If you would have come back with "I ran a FEA on the beam and the von Mises loading is not over 30% ultimate", I could have respected that.
The larger question is why you think that  designs and features should not be examined and critiqued.  There is no Consumer Reports for multihulls.  Sailors can only benefit from wide open comments.  I call them as I see them, and expect no less from others.  This makes the breed better.  One example is 30 years ago constant camber was diagonal cold molding.  I pointed out that orientation was extremely weak structurally for long slender hulls. There are advantages from an actual professional design degree.  CC now orients face grain in the 0 degree like I have been doing from day one.  They are better for it.
Name calling does not reflect well on a man.  Striving for better solutions does.
 
 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kurt, there is no consumer reports for designers either. This is why it is important to call bullshit on someone who criticizes and boasts more than they should. Funny that you mention Constant Camber. Weren't you threatened with a lawsuit for using Constant Camber after bad mouthing the process for many years. Yes, I believe it's true. You started using longitudinal curve in the mold instead of just "barrel molding? because your method wasn't working so hot, except for really skinny hulls. Isn't Constant Camber a patented process, and you were sneaking it into use hoping no-one would notice?  I don't think that grain orientation had much to do with you, Kurt.

Name calling? I seem to recall you using my name in print to endorse your designs, which is not something I would have done.         

We are all better from studying things that came before us and from seeing what comes up along the way. Criticizing other designs and designers is what does not reflect well. You came out with guns blazing from day one. Some people really enjoy collaborating and learning from each other. Other not so much...

Is your blog all like this? How does commentary like this strive for better solutions? Better yet, Let's stop this discussion. Try and have some respect for other designers, Kurt. Lots of them tell the truth about what they know and don't spout shit like this: "I ran a FEA on the beam and the von Mises loading is not over 30% ultimate".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I red Kurts blog - and even commented on it - short verion is above here.

Its very interesting when pro-designers take a open discussion on a forum like this - but hopeful without too much namecalling. 

I guess the designer of the Rapido experienced some bigger changes of the designparameters while building the boat that explains the design as it is now.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/11/2017 at 3:06 PM, jzk said:

Rapido has retired.  Just when it was looking good.

Hi All , thanks for all the positive comments regarding our performance and navigation skills !

If you were actually there and had some concept of the complex weather sytems in play at the time you might understand the decisions we took on board .

We went south because we thought it was the seaman like thing to do with the forecast we had and realized we would have some slow times before we reaped the benifits of our decision . 

As a matter of fact we had boat speeds at times exceeding 20 knots and had just completed a night of sailing hard to windward with the boat speed rarely dropping below 10 to 13 knots .

All the boats like Lagoons , Beneateaus etc were almost certainly motoring if you look at their ability to sail straight in to the wind while we were closehauled , almost magical I would say .

One FACT is we motored ZERO hours before we were dismasted in a rain squall that any well built mast should have stood up to , reefed or not ! We spent one whole night barely moving but we continued to sail .

Guess we will have to wait a few more months to show our real potential to all you Armchair Admirals out there .

Positive side is boat itself  is totally undamaged , crew fit and well and we found out we can motor 700 miles at 6 knots on half a tank of fuel !

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul, 

 In your own words, there was no clear reason for the failure of the mast.

Did the mass separate at a spreader or other connection point which might've been the source of the breakage? Are you willing to speculate at all? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey @Paul Koch - Being a fan of the tris I was bummed not to see Rapido out in front crushing it.  What are your plans at this stage for the boat?  Will you be able to get a stick back in her and do anything in the carib this season or are you guys toast?  I am assuming the carib winter regattas ain't happening anymore for you guys but wanted to hear it from the boss horse!  Best of luck and hope you do make it out...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wess said:

Hey @Paul Koch - Being a fan of the tris I was bummed not to see Rapido out in front crushing it.  What are your plans at this stage for the boat?  Will you be able to get a stick back in her and do anything in the carib this season or are you guys toast?  I am assuming the carib winter regattas ain't happening anymore for you guys but wanted to hear it from the boss horse!  Best of luck and hope you do make it out...

He already explained that they were pretty much crushing it.  Many, if not all, of the leaders you saw were motoring at times while Rapido was not.  It would be cool if we could tell who was and when.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Crushing it" might be a little overstated. Replay the beginning and you'll see them doing reasonably well - about even with the leading edge of the pack - though still 200 miles behind the leading catamarans and monohulls. After the finish you'll be able to see the skippers declared engine hours, which may not shed much light on when. It will be interesting to see how many engine hours those guys declare.

It would have been nice to have steady strong trade winds to see what the boats are capable of in perfect conditions. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/28/2017 at 8:13 PM, Russell Brown said:

Kurt, there is no consumer reports for designers either. This is why it is important to call bullshit on someone who criticizes and boasts more than they should. Funny that you mention Constant Camber. Weren't you threatened with a lawsuit for using Constant Camber after bad mouthing the process for many years. Yes, I believe it's true. You started using longitudinal curve in the mold instead of just "barrel molding? because your method wasn't working so hot, except for really skinny hulls. Isn't Constant Camber a patented process, and you were sneaking it into use hoping no-one would notice?  I don't think that grain orientation had much to do with you, Kurt.

Name calling? I seem to recall you using my name in print to endorse your designs, which is not something I would have done.         

We are all better from studying things that came before us and from seeing what comes up along the way. Criticizing other designs and designers is what does not reflect well. You came out with guns blazing from day one. Some people really enjoy collaborating and learning from each other. Other not so much...

Is your blog all like this? How does commentary like this strive for better solutions? Better yet, Let's stop this discussion. Try and have some respect for other designers, Kurt. Lots of them tell the truth about what they know and don't spout shit like this: "I ran a FEA on the beam and the von Mises loading is not over 30% ultimate".

 

Kurt, there is no consumer reports for designers either. This is why it is important to call bullshit on someone who criticizes and boasts more than they should.

Designers always look at any designs critically.  What they see should always be discussed.  Sailors should insist on it. And I never boast.

Funny that you mention Constant Camber. Weren't you threatened with a lawsuit for using Constant Camber after bad mouthing the process for many years. Yes, I believe it's true. You started using longitudinal curve in the mold instead of just "barrel molding? because your method wasn't working so hot, except for really skinny hulls. Isn't Constant Camber a had much to do with you, Kurt.

Jim Brown did threaten to sue me some 25 years ago for 20 cents per square foot for every hull I ever designed.  Turned out the patent was both too general (covered every cold molded hull ever built) and too specific (demanded a constant camber).  None of it applied.  And my method not only was working great, but what I was doing back then is almost exactly what CC did on the 65 I saw a few years ago.  And I guess I have to repeat; back then CC was only double or triple diagonal veneers or plywood, had no stringers, took lots of bog to fill the gaps, required a solid platen mold surface, could only achieve a Veed section.  A typical CC hull weighed twice or more that of a CM hull the same size.  And the strength per unit to resist global loads was only a third that of 0 degree oriented plywood.  Of course CC preferred none of this be mentioned.  Probably none of  them understood global loads nor the importance of fiber orientation.  I should have kept it to myself?  And if I have to repeat again,  CM hulls gave full round section shapes, light weight, 0 degree oriented face grain, smooth surfaces needing minimal bog. CM is limited to a waterline L/B of 10/1.  With any material I would never make a fatter hull.  And again, the CC I saw last was using almost all of my techniques and none of the ones they advocated 25 years ago.

When you built your own boat you didn’t even use CC.

Name calling? I seem to recall you using my name in print to endorse your designs, which is not something I would have done.     

I have never used your name to endorse anything, ever.   I do give you a shout-out in my construction manual for your inventive grinder tool.    Can erase it if you prefer.

We are all better from studying things that came before us and from seeing what comes up along the way.  Criticizing other designs and designers is what does not reflect well. You came out with guns blazing from day one. Some people really enjoy collaborating and learning from each other. Other not so much...Is your blog all like this? How does commentary like this strive for better solutions? Better yet, Let's stop this discussion. Try and have some respect for other designers, Kurt. Lots of them tell the truth about what they know and don't spout shit like this: "I ran a FEA on the beam and the von Mises loading is not over 30% ultimate".

You should look at the blog a time or two.  Have someone explain von Mises to you and you won’t think it shit.  My point was you didn’t refute a single technical point I brought up on my blog.  I welcome technical back and forth; spleen is pretty useless.  Typical CM hull from back then.

 

 

kolea.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a strange odd tangent this thread took.  Designers slamming other designers and builders.  I don't get it.

Not that they are all on the same level but at least for me, each contributed something I admire... but  Bob slams Brent.  Russ says stop  (I agreed BTW).  Kurt slams Paul.  Russ says stop (and again I agreed BTW).  But Russ slams Rob.  Ian slams Corsair.  And the list could go on and on and on... I mean geeze and I just don't get it.  Everyone on this list has done something in life with designing, building, and/or sailing that is really cool and I (and a lot of folks I suspect) really admire.  But the personality that often seem lurking behind it all, the negativity, I just don't understand.  How can folks that get to do such cool things be so angry so often?  Or is the business just that much a a dog eat dog world??  Or maybe I am just an overly sensitive wussy boy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/11/2017 at 12:18 AM, Paul Koch said:

Hi All , thanks for all the positive comments regarding our performance and navigation skills !

If you were actually there and had some concept of the complex weather sytems in play at the time you might understand the decisions we took on board .

We went south because we thought it was the seaman like thing to do with the forecast we had and realized we would have some slow times before we reaped the benifits of our decision . 

As a matter of fact we had boat speeds at times exceeding 20 knots and had just completed a night of sailing hard to windward with the boat speed rarely dropping below 10 to 13 knots .

All the boats like Lagoons , Beneateaus etc were almost certainly motoring if you look at their ability to sail straight in to the wind while we were closehauled , almost magical I would say .

One FACT is we motored ZERO hours before we were dismasted in a rain squall that any well built mast should have stood up to , reefed or not ! We spent one whole night barely moving but we continued to sail .

Guess we will have to wait a few more months to show our real potential to all you Armchair Admirals out there .

Positive side is boat itself  is totally undamaged , crew fit and well and we found out we can motor 700 miles at 6 knots on half a tank of fuel !

 

 

 

Thanks Paul -  just ignore the dipshits.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wess said:

What a strange odd tangent this thread took.  Designers slamming other designers and builders.  I don't get it.

Not that they are all on the same level but at least for me, each contributed something I admire... but  Bob slams Brent.  Russ says stop  (I agreed BTW).  Kurt slams Paul.  Russ says stop (and again I agreed BTW).  But Russ slams Rob.  Ian slams Corsair.  And the list could go on and on and on... I mean geeze and I just don't get it.  Everyone on this list has done something in life with designing, building, and/or sailing that is really cool and I (and a lot of folks I suspect) really admire.  But the personality that often seem lurking behind it all, the negativity, I just don't understand.  How can folks that get to do such cool things be so angry so often?  Or is the business just that much a a dog eat dog world??  Or maybe I am just an overly sensitive wussy boy!

Fish (not necessarily even that big) in a tiny fish bowl.  It's passion that drives them into this tiny bowl, not economics.  As sailors we benefit from this passion despite the feuding.  Carry on.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wess, for me it is about honesty in advertising. Being honest about what you are selling seems like it would always be the best approach, but a couple of multihull designers defend their places in the market by attacking perceived rivals and often presenting misleading information about their own designs (such as how much a boat will cost, weigh, perform, and man-hours involved). This bothers me to the point of saying something publicly, which I should not do. I get worked up to the point of voicing my point of view and then I regret it. I don't seem to cause conflict in my community and rarely speak out about anything (except maybe mega yachts and monster trucks).

Why did I speak out about Kurt's critique of the Rapido? I guess it just strikes me as a bit ridiculous that someone who has probably never had a boat in a major offshore race (and who probably doesn't go sailing much) should basically flay a design from a firm that has had many original and successful designs to their credit (one of which sailed and won the longest and toughest race there is).

Is it wrong of me to say something? Probably so. It's a bit hard not to say something having been an observer as long as I have. I am pretty aware that my perspective is just that; my perspective, and I could be very wrong.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Russell Brown said:

Being honest about what you are selling seems like it would always be the best approach, but a couple of multihull designers defend their places in the market by attacking perceived rivals and often presenting misleading information about their own designs (such as how much a boat will cost, weigh, perform, and man-hours involved). This bothers me to the point of saying something publicly, which I should not do. I get worked up to the point of voicing my point of view and then I regret it.

 

Bravo.

If more people like yourself speak up, then maybe we will see change.

 

Its not just a few  scumbag designers , but a large majority of the whole multihull industry publish misleading information.  From  misleading displacement and bridge deck clearance figures, to drawing small pillows on the beds on interior layout drawings to make them seem more roomy and highly exaggerated average expected  cruising speeds. The whole industry is rotten.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, overlay said:

and highly exaggerated average expected  cruising speeds.

Right now the leading cat is averaging 0.4 knots faster than the leading monohull. Good on them - but not quite the 2x speeds that are so frequently promised. It has not been typical weather for the ARC, but it is a typical result. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of agree, kind of not. The world seems to finally accept multihulls, but the multihulls that have become the norm are mostly pretty lame as sailboats. That's why I like boats like the Rapido. It's got a bit of condo to it, but mostly it is pure sailboat.

The multihull designers that I have know well have been honest about their boats. Some more than others, of course, but It seems like the best designers are the most honest about performance, weight, cost, etc. 

I still think that anyone who doesn't like multihulls has never sailed on a good one.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was looking to buy a trimaran, I had contacted some of the designers being discussed. I found one to be a "Quiet Giant" in the multihull world. The other ones, not so much. It was the level of honesty and helpfulness I experienced from the "QG" that really helped me in my search.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Russell Brown said:

I still think that anyone who doesn't like multihulls has never sailed on a good one.

A bit overly broad, don't you think? "many people" perhaps, but not "anyone".

I thought the Rapido had potential. Too bad it wasn't able to complete the ARC.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DDW said:

A bit overly broad, don't you think? "many people" perhaps, but not "anyone".

I thought the Rapido had potential. Too bad it wasn't able to complete the ARC.

 

 

I still think it does have potential despite not being able to finish the ARC.  My interpretation of Paul's comment is that he's pretty unhappy with the spar builder more than anything.    Apart from the obvious $$$ of the 60, there are two things that would keep me from going that route.  #1 Unprotected helm, especially for offshore use.  Yes, yes, yes, ya use the autopilot offshore, but there's still no protected watch standing location.  #2, it's still just a too powerful and large rig for a couple (in my case that equals single handing essentially--for a someone who's closing in on Medicaid...)   

The 50 loses all the grace of the 60 to try and maintain accommodations.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it has potential too.  But Kurt Hughes comments on weight, beam and structure were interesting and haven't been rebutted.  The design decisions probably make sense for the target market (docking, living space), and overall beam and discontinuous beams may have been requirements of the brief.  It'd be interesting to know, but apart from the apparently unironic ad hominem comments from Russel B, there's been silence.  I find it odd that a designer gets attacked for providing a technical critique, and annoying if those attacks mean we don't hear sensible answers to the actual issues. 

Presumably RB is now over on the cruising and sailing pages reprimanding Bob Perry, who criticizes other designers day in day out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Veeger said:

I still think it does have potential despite not being able to finish the ARC.  My interpretation of Paul's comment is that he's pretty unhappy with the spar builder more than anything.    Apart from the obvious $$$ of the 60, there are two things that would keep me from going that route.  #1 Unprotected helm, especially for offshore use.  Yes, yes, yes, ya use the autopilot offshore, but there's still no protected watch standing location.  #2, it's still just a too powerful and large rig for a couple (in my case that equals single handing essentially--for a someone who's closing in on Medicaid...)   

The 50 loses all the grace of the 60 to try and maintain accommodations.....

I think it has more than a lot of potential performance wise ! It was totally not the boat or crews fault the mast fell down in a approx 29 Knot gust of wind while reefed with 2 reefs and a staysail . We did everything a prudent cruising yacht crew would do to sail safely and conservativally  in the conditions prevailling and predicted by the approching cold front ! We await the results of annalises being carried out by our mast supplier !

Regarding the helm position , yes it gives you the best allround visibility of almost any yacht on the market . It almost never gets any spray at this point and the only annoying thing can be the strength of the apparent wind , easy to fit a screen to stop this and problem solved . Alternativley we can build a fully enclosed wheel house if you want it !

Yes the rig is large and great in light winds . We can supply a smaller cruising rig if you are not worried about light air performance , horses for courses !

Autopilot with Jefa drive is sensational and never misses a beat !

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, bigmarv said:

I think it has potential too.  But Kurt Hughes comments on weight, beam and structure were interesting and haven't been rebutted.  The design decisions probably make sense for the target market (docking, living space), and overall beam and discontinuous beams may have been requirements of the brief.  It'd be interesting to know, but apart from the apparently unironic ad hominem comments from Russel B, there's been silence.  I find it odd that a designer gets attacked for providing a technical critique, and annoying if those attacks mean we don't hear sensible answers to the actual issues. 

Presumably RB is now over on the cruising and sailing pages reprimanding Bob Perry, who criticizes other designers day in day out.

I am not going to comment on other designers views of the construction methods used to build the Rapido . It is extremely well engineed to do what it was designed to do . It has lots of advantages when it comes to shipping or storing the boat .  We tested the whole structure of Hull number 1 by subjecting it to the max possible sailing loads that we could simulate using a couple of 30 ton cranes to try and break the beam structures while attached to the boat . Appart from some flexing that you would expect in the beams no cracks or issues appeared any where in the boat .

I can tell you it was a scary process  but once it was done we have no issues sleeping at night while belting to windward in heavy seas in the middle of the Atlantic . 

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/3/2017 at 8:52 AM, Paul Koch said:

I am not going to comment on other designers views of the construction methods used to build the Rapido . It is extremely well engineed to do what it was designed to do . It has lots of advantages when it comes to shipping or storing the boat .  We tested the whole structure of Hull number 1 by subjecting it to the max possible sailing loads that we could simulate using a couple of 30 ton cranes to try and break the beam structures while attached to the boat . Appart from some flexing that you would expect in the beams no cracks or issues appeared any where in the boat .

I can tell you it was a scary process  but once it was done we have no issues sleeping at night while belting to windward in heavy seas in the middle of the Atlantic . 

Hats off to you Paul. That is a thoughtful, balanced, informative, and helpful response, speaking as somebody who was interested and following the Rapido project.

I don't want to put words in your mouth but I think it was suggested this was/is a Southern Spars issue.  Do you think so (that the problem was the mast build)?  Were you guys able to recover any parts of the rig and/or photograph what was left to be able to speculate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul

You have built a terrific yacht  and hope that you  have much success with your business.   very unfortunate  that the mast failed,  but this happens quite often to many different designs for a myriad of reasons.   Thank goodness the crew and yacht returned safety  without any  other dramas.

Would you please comment on pointing and tacking angles achieved , we're you able to emulate M&M's thetheoretical  polars

What was  your relative speed vs wind  on various points of sail.

 

Thanks  Ross

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎12‎/‎29‎/‎2017 at 4:27 AM, eastern motors said:

Paul,

Did you ever post drawings of the "Extreme weather cruiser" version?  You know CA loves a good pilothouse.  

Guess I haven't but it is very doable if someone wants a pilot house version ! I have done some basic drawings which I am happy to share with you via email . just PM me ! I would rather put some thing a bit more finished up here for public consumption which I do when we get a spare minute !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, rmw207 said:

Paul

You have built a terrific yacht  and hope that you  have much success with your business.   very unfortunate  that the mast failed,  but this happens quite often to many different designs for a myriad of reasons.   Thank goodness the crew and yacht returned safety  without any  other dramas.

Would you please comment on pointing and tacking angles achieved , we're you able to emulate M&M's thetheoretical  polars

What was  your relative speed vs wind  on various points of sail.

 

Thanks  Ross

Hi Ross ,

Upwind when racing we tack through a genuine 90 degrees made good as displayed on our chart plotter ! Sure we can point higher but boat speed suffers accordingly . I think we are achieving figures very close to the polar's but I don't have them laid out in front of me to put here at the moment . Put it this way we have given a couple TP52 's more than a hurry up upwind , ask anyone who was at the 2016 Kings Cup Regatta in Thailand . 

Total pain in the arse that our mast snapped like it did in conditions any offshore rig should handle all day every day ! Also to date I am not impressed with the response we received from our mast manufacturer ! Time for them to step up and do the right thing is rapidly running out !

Regards Paul

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Paul Koch said:

 

Total pain in the arse that our mast snapped like it did in conditions any offshore rig should handle all day every day ! Also to date I am not impressed with the response we received from our mast manufacturer ! Time for them to step up and do the right thing is rapidly running out !

Well that sucks to hear!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank Paul 

Good luck getting the mast problem resolved.  

I was wondering if your tri could be dried out on a favorable beach. Is there any protection  on the running gear. Given the large beam , finding a travel lift or other facilities could be an issue

Best Ross

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New mast and sails coming I hear, the boat is for sale

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes number 1 and Number 4 are available ! Number 1, which is currently in the Canary Islands  will have new rig and sails in a few months and is for sale , always has been available for anyone who wants a very well equipped boat imediately!

It is our demo boat and yes it is possible to pull up the daggerboard and rudder to beach it if in a suitable location .

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

curious,

Will you be going with a aluminium mast?

I can not help thinking aluminium is a better option on a cruiser racer multi hull.

Proven, durable, better insurance, minimal performance loss etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No it is a Hall Spars High modulus carbon mast with North 3Di sails . 

Could put a alloy rig and less expensive sails at a reduced price if some one wants it like that !

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now