Recommended Posts

I see one regularly sailing in/out of the west river near Annapolis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are none in Australia unfortunately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mine's parked in front of my shop. There's one on Vancouver Island that the guy doesn't use but doesn't want to sell. There's one in Santa Cruz. Pocket Rocket was in Vancouver, but not now. That's what I know of on the West coast.

R2AK.5_259-11.jpeg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My old one Grateful, is playing with a wonderful family in Michigan. 

Share this post


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

I see one regularly sailing in/out of the west river near Annapolis.

Would that be Flipper?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, ALL@SEA said:

There are none in Australia unfortunately.

Agree, would be great to see such an amazing boat that was a long way ahead of its time.  We did have a smaller Oram I think that looked very similar, had old skiff sails on it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, plywoodboy said:

Agree, would be great to see such an amazing boat that was a long way ahead of its time.  We did have a smaller Oram I think that looked very similar, had old skiff sails on it? 

Bob Oram's "Who Cares" was inspired by the G32, and was from (fading) memory 7.5ish meters with an OLD 16' skiff rig and a 25hp outboard. A cool boat, but not in the same league as the G32. 

Share this post


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

Would that be Flipper?

Yup, that's the one. Stopped by today to say hi, he was chilling just south of Shadyside. Man, what a cool boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, gui said:

Yup, that's the one. Stopped by today to say hi, he was chilling just south of Shadyside. Man, what a cool boat.

I was impressed with all of the work he did to Flipper - and was lucky enough to get a ride on it recently.  He's a damn good sailor and a super cool guy. 

20200712_094137.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JanetC Gougeon32 said:

I know of one in Germany,  and Greg's in Bay City Mich. Mine's in Charlotte NC. I thought there was one in Florida, but I haven't heard any recent news.  I was hoping to track them down, as these boats are too cool to drift into oblivion.  

 

20200716_142409.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a sweet screecher! 

Your main is cut like mine as well.

Have you seen the larger roach main from Doyle? Flipper had one and I really liked it.  It spilled off in a gust, and it seemed like I wasn't easing the main as much. Maybe I ease the main too early, then again I haven't tipped over in a long time either;)

I think my staysail screecher looks more like Russ's. I need to get some pics of my boat sailing.. 

46213685_2155349597821218_6948352045124419584_o.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The G-32 in Florida was called Double Trouble, I think. it's now in Maine being rebuilt by my old friend Lew. It's getting an underwingectomy, where you cut out the underwing and glue a new one in. If any of you G-32 owners still have the vinyl covering the cabin floor, get it out of there as it's a moisture trap. The only balsa in the boat is in the underwing and the upper skin is thin and was not sealed before the padding and vinyl.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are very cool, interesting boats.  As someone who has spent countless hours on narrow R33s with very tall masts I get that a narrow cat can be a weapon.  For some reason I find the idea of water ballast to be problematic.  How often do you use it on the G32?  Do you like it?  Ever get caught with it on the wrong side?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, mundt said:

These are very cool, interesting boats.  As someone who has spent countless hours on narrow R33s with very tall masts I get that a narrow cat can be a weapon.  For some reason I find the idea of water ballast to be problematic.  How often do you use it on the G32?  Do you like it?  Ever get caught with it on the wrong side?  

I use mine A LOT. The system works well by gravity alone, but I have pumps that empty the tanks in addition to the gravity so I can empty the entire tank in a few minutes.  They fill in about 2 minutes, and they make the boat alot faster in heavy air. 

The tanks are 600 gallons, and do make tacking slower-more difficult - no tacking duels by any means.  I probably lose 12 boat lengths a tack so I make a habit of banging the corners.  There are baffles in the tanks to keep the water from sloshing around too much. 

Getting caught on the wrong side isn't much of an option.  If you are in a potential slam tack situation I keep some water to leeward. It's faster than tipping over ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JanetC Gougeon32 said:

The tanks are 600 gallons...

That would be ~five thousand pounds!!  From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gougeon_32

Quote

It displaces 1,100 lb (499 kg) and carries 1,200 lb (544 kg) of flooding water ballast, 600 lb (272 kg) in each hull.

So the water ballast can effectively double the displacement?  What's the difference in waterline (or draft) with water ballast and without? Or the boat's PPI?

Does 1,100 lbs. sound correct with two crew and loaded for ten days of wilderness coastal sailing?

P.S.  1,200 lbs. = ~140 gallons of seawater ballast (8.6 lbs/gal), up to 70 gallons per hull.

Share this post


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

That would be ~five thousand pounds!!  From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gougeon_32

So the water ballast can effectively double the displacement?  What's the difference in waterline (or draft) with water ballast and without? Or the boat's PPI?

Does 1,100 lbs. sound correct with two crew and loaded for ten days of wilderness coastal sailing?

P.S.  1,200 lbs. = ~140 gallons of seawater ballast (8.6 lbs/gal), up to 70 gallons per hull.

You are right. It's 600lbs of water, not 600 gallons.  I was way off. Thanks for the catch. The waterline length is about the same when the water ballast tanks are full, the hulls just sit a couple of inches lower in the water if that makes sense. I've never measured how much lower. When you are sitting on the dock with one tank full and one tank empty it will lean to one side a little, but not that much. I know answers like yay big aren't that descriptive, but that's all I have at the moment.  

And I doubt 1100lbs is the weight of the boat loaded down with gear and crew. My boat is definitely heavier than that now.  My boat is heavier than 1100lbs with gear and without the crew.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, JanetC Gougeon32 said:

The waterline length is about the same when the water ballast tanks are full, the hulls just sit lower in the water if that makes sense. 

Yeah, what I meant was how much does the waterline height change from empty ballast tanks to when they are full?  How much does it sink?
Pounds Per Inch immersion (PPI).

Using only one hull at a time takes some thinking ahead (I guess?) and works best on long tacks.

Proa note: water ballast stays in the same windward hull on either tack. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like unloaded displacement to me?

If displacement per hull is 550 lbs, that is 250kg, or 0.250m3 freshwater.

it is a canoe shaped hull with even rocker and ~ semicircular underwater section, so Cp is going to be say ~ 0.53.

So the ~ midships cross sectional area for a 9.75m hull is: (0.250/0.53)/9.75 which is 0.048m2.

To get that area using a something near a semi circle: r= ((0.048/3.1416)^0.5)/0.5 which is 0.248m

So the “midship” section is 0.0.496m wide by 0.0.248m deep. (19.5inches wide by 9.76inches deep)

Waterplane area will be 9.75*0.496*(say Cp~ 0.6) = 2.904m2.

Assuming vertical sides, stem and transom, 300lb or 136kg (0.136m2) water ballast in each hull needs an immersion of: 0.136/2.904 which is 0.047m. Or 47mm or 1.84inches for each hull? And PPI would be ~ 163.

So fully loaded and ballasted, probably means an immersion of double that?

Still amazing that a 32ft multihull is that light, unloaded. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ProaSailor said:

Yeah, what I meant was how much does the waterline height change from empty ballast tanks to when they are full?  How much does it sink?
Pounds Per Inch immersion (PPI).

Using only one hull at a time takes some thinking ahead (I guess?) and works best on long tacks.

Proa note: water ballast stays in the same windward hull on either tack. 

I could take pics of the boat at the dock with the tanks full and empty next time I get it in the water. I'm curious now...it doesn't seem like much to me.... maybe 2 inches I'm guessing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JanetC Gougeon32 said:

maybe 2 inches I'm guessing.  

I rest my case......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Sidecar said:

Sounds like unloaded displacement to me?

If displacement per hull is 550 lbs, that is 250kg, or 0.250m3 freshwater.

it is a canoe shaped hull with even rocker and ~ semicircular underwater section, so Cp is going to be say ~ 0.53.

So the ~ midships cross sectional area for a 9.75m hull is: (0.250/0.53)/9.75 which is 0.048m2.

To get that area using a something near a semi circle: r= ((0.048/3.1416)^0.5)/0.5 which is 0.248m

So the “midship” section is 0.0.496m wide by 0.0.248m deep. (19.5inches wide by 9.76inches deep)

Waterplane area will be 9.75*0.496*(say Cp~ 0.6) = 2.904m2.

Assuming vertical sides, stem and transom, 300lb or 136kg (0.136m2) water ballast in each hull needs an immersion of: 0.136/2.904 which is 0.047m. Or 47mm or 1.84inches for each hull? And PPI would be ~ 163.

So fully loaded and ballasted, probably means an immersion of double that?

Still amazing that a 32ft multihull is that light, unloaded. 

 

Jan told me the hulls were 22 to 1 and the draft is about 9 inches when the boat is empty, so you are on the money mister! 

Share this post


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

And if you can't find an original you could build...........

https://ikarus342000.com/MAXIpage.html

I've seen this, and its a cool concept. I just won't believe that is will compare to a G32 until I see it perform. 

Share this post


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

Sounds like unloaded displacement to me?

If displacement per hull is 550 lbs, that is 250kg, or 0.250m3 freshwater.

it is a canoe shaped hull with even rocker and ~ semicircular underwater section, so Cp is going to be say ~ 0.53.

So the ~ midships cross sectional area for a 9.75m hull is: (0.250/0.53)/9.75 which is 0.048m2.

To get that area using a something near a semi circle: r= ((0.048/3.1416)^0.5)/0.5 which is 0.248m

So the “midship” section is 0.0.496m wide by 0.0.248m deep. (19.5inches wide by 9.76inches deep)

Waterplane area will be 9.75*0.496*(say Cp~ 0.6) = 2.904m2.

Assuming vertical sides, stem and transom, 300lb or 136kg (0.136m2) water ballast in each hull needs an immersion of: 0.136/2.904 which is 0.047m. Or 47mm or 1.84inches for each hull? And PPI would be ~ 163.

So fully loaded and ballasted, probably means an immersion of double that?

Still amazing that a 32ft multihull is that light, unloaded. 

I'll take a wild guess that your Cp estimate of ~ 0.53 is low but won't go to the trouble of trying to duplicate this hull in CAD to check all your figures.

Just one thing to clarify though, a two inch difference between empty and full is 600 lbs/inch PPI for both hulls combined, or 300 PPI on each hull.  Right?

So does your estimate of PPI = ~ 163 mean Kg per inch for one hull (360 lbs/inch)?  Otherwise it doesn't sound correct to me?

The hulls are obviously designed to be "overloaded" gracefully so provisions for an extended cruise are not a problem, just maybe use less water ballast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, ProaSailor said:

I'll take a wild guess that your Cp estimate of ~ 0.53 is low but won't go to the trouble of trying to duplicate this hull in CAD to check all your figures.

Just one thing to clarify though, a two inch difference between empty and full is 600 lbs/inch PPI for both hulls combined, or 300 PPI on each hull.  Right?

So does your estimate of PPI = ~ 163 mean Kg per inch for one hull (360 lbs/inch)?  Otherwise it doesn't sound correct to me?

The hulls are obviously designed to be "overloaded" gracefully so provisions for an extended cruise are not a problem, just maybe use less water ballast.

I'm more certain of the 600 lb of ballast in each hull vs. the 2" estimate.  I never measured the difference in displacement, so I couldn't say for sure. 

Share this post


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

So does your estimate of PPI = ~ 163 mean Kg per inch for one hull (360 lbs/inch)?  Otherwise it doesn't sound correct to me?

It was for ONE hull. So double it to get overall Pounds per Inch immersion.... And it is all fag packet calculation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It definitely leans a lot if you forget and leave the drain open before stopping the boat and it floats a lot lower with the tanks full. I don't know how much lower either. I also don't know how much my boat weighs, which is kind of lame as I could weigh it.. A lot of weight and 45 lbs of gelcoat chips went to the dump.

As far as how the ballast works; it works great, but it does take a bit of thought. I don't have electric pumps, so mostly have to drain the weather tank before tacking. I have gone upwind in over 40 knots with both tanks ballasted and the performance was kind of amazing, even if the wind was trying to suck everything out of the boat. I also did the first part of a race a few weeks ago where we crossed the straits with winds in the low to mid 30's. It was mostly close reaching, but with really fucked seas from big tides. I shook out the reefs in the main about halfway and then couldn't get it reefed again when the wind came back on again, so was dogging in horrible slop for the last part of the crossing. I did get across ahead of anyone else, but the ballast kept the boat sailing flat and not scary at all, which is kind of amazing seeing as the boat is so narrow. It just doesn't take much power. I dropped out because the race started at 7pm and I couldn't see sailing in that kind of wind all night. As it turned out all the boats sailed into a big hole right after I dropped out.

Photos from Sean Trew from the start.

 

104953654_3329815890374577_5038290551577920494_o.jpg

105277668_3329815937041239_4136131310997147610_o.jpg

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russell, do you know if Dean still has the G32 at his place just north of San Francisco?  I haven't talked to him in a year or so...

-greg carter

Share this post


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

Russell, do you know if Dean still has the G32 at his place just north of San Francisco?  I haven't talked to him in a year or so...

-greg carter

Dean sold the boat to a young guy who sails it out of Santa Cruz with his family.

Max, do you remember if it was called Double Trouble? i think that's what the one now in Maine was called.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/20/2020 at 9:33 AM, JanetC Gougeon32 said:

That is a sweet screecher! 

Your main is cut like mine as well.

Have you seen the larger roach main from Doyle? Flipper had one and I really liked it.  It spilled off in a gust, and it seemed like I wasn't easing the main as much. Maybe I ease the main too early, then again I haven't tipped over in a long time either;)

I think my staysail screecher looks more like Russ's. I need to get some pics of my boat sailing.. 

46213685_2155349597821218_6948352045124419584_o.jpeg

Thanks! I think it's the original one that came with the boat, so it's a bit tired. I haven't seen a larger roach main, but I don't feel like I need more power much of the time as it is. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with Russell that the water ballast takes some thought and planning. It can be a pain if wind is up and then lets up because I've found that having enough speed (~5-6knts or so) is important to help it drain. I've also had some trouble keeping the tanks sealed from the top (plexiglass covers) and my water level gauges don't work, so I try to reef before I turn to ballast myself. (Any tips on sealing those covers?) I do love the 'insurance' of the water ballast though and it allows me to confidently single hand in a lot of different weather.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jan's boat "Pocket Rocket" spent 1/2 a summer in surgery at Greene Marine (new lexan installed) and my driveway (balsa replaced), and 1.5 summers on Lake Champlain.  Then she went to Vancouver with plans for R2AK, but got sold and went silent.

IMG_0573.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Dean sold the boat to a young guy who sails it out of Santa Cruz with his family.

 

Sometimes I wish I would of kept the G32, but it came down to choosing between it and Russell's little tri when evacuating from the wild fires and it has found a good home with a nice family in Santa Cruz. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's fantastic to hear about these real world experiences with water ballast on a multihull.

Perhaps not as fancy or optimal as you-know-who's favorite topic (foils), but MUCH cheaper and easier to live with on a boat for us regular Joe's. 

I've always been a huge proponent of it, but only "theoretical" discussions seem to abound the internet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A fascinating inside look at a marine design – three decades ago
https://www.compositesworld.com/articles/a-fascinating-inside-look-at-a-marine-design-three-decades-ago

This is a well written piece that summarizes and/or borrows from the "official" history of G32 design found on this page:

Development, Design and Construction of the G-32 Sailboat
This article was contributed by Meade Gougeon, Gougeon Brothers, Inc.
http://www.gougeon.com/prosetepoxy/G-32/welcome.html

Quote

So, to save both weight and cost, they chose a new manufacturing method for the time, with the following steps:

1) Epoxy resin, formulated with a longer out-time, would be used for maximum properties, with the out-time enabling only one vacuum step, with the entire laminate compacted at once.

2) A polyester-based gelcoat in female molds would give a low-cost yet finished surface with a minimum of print-through. The authors note that they solved the significant problem of bonding the polyester gelcoat surface and the epoxy laminate with a specially-developed tie-coat substance, applied between the two dissimilar materials during the manufacturing process.

3) All reinforcing materials would be wet out mechanically with a roll-coater machine to reduce labor and achieve better resin control.

4) The specially-designed long open time epoxy resin would be post-cured at temperatures not exceeding 140°F to achieve high physical properties.

The two brothers carefully evaluated reinforcing materials to make the best laminate, when considering cost, panel performance, labor to assemble and finished outer surface quality. A matrix of 30 combinations were initially evaluated [...]  The PRO-SET epoxy resin system, with an open time of 4 hours, was developed in Gougeon’s own labs expressly for use with this new manufacturing process.
[...]
They conclude, “…the 14 G-32s that were built have performed as expected, with no structural failures of any kind. A bonus is that their light weight, combined with long slim hulls, has made for exceedingly fast boats that have won many races.”

gou1.jpg.3cd30a6492c5d05afabeebd104eb3c08.jpg gou5.jpg.646ccb4a3da39aabbfbe2b6a2fa1ed0c.jpg

P.S.  https://sailboatdata.com/sailboat/gougeon-32

J5thkT7l1j2O5xyxz2z2NetwS2AxwKKiwYTIxfrs.jpeg.ff516f08f71d7bcfbb04327cfa388053.jpeg

P.P.S.  http://ptwatercraft.com/blog/?paged=2&cat=49

G32-smokey-med.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/21/2020 at 9:28 AM, ProaSailor said:

I'll take a wild guess that your Cp estimate of ~ 0.53 is low but won't go to the trouble of trying to duplicate this hull in CAD to check all your figures.

Just one thing to clarify though, a two inch difference between empty and full is 600 lbs/inch PPI for both hulls combined, or 300 PPI on each hull.  Right?

So does your estimate of PPI = ~ 163 mean Kg per inch for one hull (360 lbs/inch)?  Otherwise it doesn't sound correct to me?

The hulls are obviously designed to be "overloaded" gracefully so provisions for an extended cruise are not a problem, just maybe use less water ballast.

Turn it around the other way and eliminate all the guesswork on sectional areas..... Using Jan Gougeon’s figure of 22:1 L/B (which is 17.5inches or 0.445m beam): Waterplane area = 9.75*0.445*(say ~ 0.6) which is ~ 2.60metres.

Still assuming vertical stem, stern and topsides: immersion for 0.136m3 water ballast per hull = 0.136/2.6 which is 0.053metres or 53mm (2.1inches). And a PPI of ~143 for one hull.

So ~ 286lbs per inch overall and ~ 2.10inch immersion for 600lb waterballast.

Share this post


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

So ~ 286lbs per inch overall and ~ 2.10inch immersion for 600lb waterballast.

"overall", meaning that each hull (and the whole boat when both hulls are used), will sink 4.2" when the ballast tanks are full?

I can dial up a 32 foot proa hull with Cp = 0.66, Beam WL = 1.43 feet, draft = 8+ inches, displacement = 1,100 lbs., Waterplane area (Awp) = 34.4 sq. feet (3.2 sq meters).  It has a PPI of ~190 lbs/inch (per hull!) so would sink ~3.2 inches when 600 lb. water ballast tank is full.  Speculation but our estimates are close.

Rhino CAD file attached.  proa32_G32.3dm

proa32_G32b.png.0c6241e419a8be036f49f5e6d5e38b88.png

proa32_G32a.png.169063d356a53a85880b7af5b5b801c9.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I personally find in common with foils and water ballast is that not if but when they fail or break you are on a boat that isn't designed to function well without.  Of course you could say that about many other parts of the boat but it just bothers me that you had to add on a kind of "artifice" to get your design to function.  Love the G32 and obviously the designers were ingenious but I'd love to see the same boat 16 feet wide with a slightly taller rig and no water ballast.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, mundt said:

What I personally find in common with foils and water ballast is that not if but when they fail or break you are on a boat that isn't designed to function well without.  Of course you could say that about many other parts of the boat but it just bothers me that you had to add on a kind of "artifice" to get your design to function.  Love the G32 and obviously the designers were ingenious but I'd love to see the same boat 16 feet wide with a slightly taller rig and no water ballast.  

Someone actually did just that to a G32. They called it "The Daniels 32" and it was interesting. There were pictures of the boat posted in Boat Design Forums years ago. Now I'd be really interested in tracking that boat down just to see what became of it. 

For me, the G32 just ticked all the right boxes.

1.) Set up and trailer launch in 15 minutes 

2.) Big enough for the great lakes (ChiMac) 

3.) Could sail to it's rating solo (most boats need rail meat to sail to their rating)

4.) Fast as possible... 

6.) Can go in a normal slip. 

The fact that I don't need a truck that can tow 5,000 lbs is a bonus.

I can beach it too... not that I ever would. The water ballast took a little time to get used to, but the boat is so much faster with it that I'm a true believer, and like you I didn't used to be.  The Alinghi cat built before the decision 35 had water ballast, and that cat was faster than the decision 35.  Righting moment is righting moment. The math doesn't care if it came from buoyancy of Gravity.  The cool part about water ballast is that you can have your cake and eat it too, by having both lower volume hulls or a narrower beam and "lightness" and still get some righting moment to keep up with the guys who pay for that righting moment with extra volume, width and weight at lower wind speeds. 

I think the G32 was designed to beat the greater windage trimarans in lighter air while keeping up in heavier air. The sweet spot for those boats is 8 to 10 TWS, which is what the average wind speed was on the great lakes for a while. 

Jan started with a list of the things he wanted the boat to do, and he achieved everything on his list, and created one of the most unique boats ever produced in numbers.  I doubt we will ever see the likes of anything like this again, because no one with the talent and cash to pull it off would ever take such a risk without lining up buyers first (like the Decision 35 for example) and Jan and Meade were targeting sailors of more modest means.. That's one of the reasons why I love this boat. It's a work of art and the sailing world will never see the likes of something so different again. 

But given how single handed sailing has become more popular, maybe G32s will always have a home in the multihull racing community.

It's a shame concave curves were made illegal in the mini650 class. A G32 derivative would have evolved naturally given the other constraints.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ProaSailor said:

"overall", meaning that each hull (and the whole boat when both hulls are used), will sink 4.2" when the ballast tanks are full?

I can dial up a 32 foot proa hull with Cp = 0.66, Beam WL = 1.43 feet, draft = 8+ inches, displacement = 1,100 lbs., Waterplane area (Awp) = 34.4 sq. feet (3.2 sq meters).  It has a PPI of ~190 lbs/inch (per hull!) so would sink ~3.2 inches when 600 lb. water ballast tank is full.  Speculation but our estimates are close.

Rhino CAD file attached.  proa32_G32.3dm

proa32_G32b.png.0c6241e419a8be036f49f5e6d5e38b88.png

proa32_G32a.png.169063d356a53a85880b7af5b5b801c9.png

Now I'm super curious. I'll measure the hulls next time it's in the water. Personally, the difference between "about 2 inches" and "maybe 3 and 1/2 inches" wasn't something I thought too much about. I tried to keep the boat as light as I could followed by the goal of keeping the boat on it's feet.. 

How are your sail cut cad skills? I suspect thinking about screecher shapes on an articulating bowsprit would be more interesting.  Come to think of it,  isn't the Pacific proa's mast to windward of the boat's headsail tacks?  Think about a screecher where the luff of the sail can be pulled tight and to leward for upwind work, and then you can raise the sprit (to induce a flying sail shape) and use the same sail more efficiently and effectively downwind.  That's some wicked voodoo.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love water ballast, it's cheap, clean, and useful for crowd control when pulling the. boat.  One time a gathering around our G32 started to get on my nerves, when a valley girl said "It looks so demonic".  I snapped "empty the holding tanks [ballast]  son".   He did, and people fled , slipping quickly uphill on the. launch ramp.   I named the tanks the Samoan. Cigarette Girls.    To stop the leaks in Plexiglas ports try using low viscosity windshield silicon calking from auto parts stores, it lasts a a couple of years. and then must be reapplied. Aloha, Guerdon.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, guerdon said:

I love water ballast, it's cheap, clean, and useful for crowd control when pulling the. boat.  One time a gathering around our G32 started to get on my nerves, when a valley girl said "It looks so demonic".  I snapped "empty the holding tanks [ballast]  son".   He did, and people fled , slipping quickly uphill on the. launch ramp.   I named the tanks the Samoan. Cigarette Girls.    To stop the leaks in Plexiglas ports try using low viscosity windshield silicon calking from auto parts stores, it lasts a a couple of years. and then must be reapplied. Aloha, Guerdon.

Thanks! I'll give that a try

Share this post


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

Speculation but our estimates are close.

My proa hull yesterday was a hasty sketch using the first "proa hull generator" tool I found among a handful I've written.  Dimensions and displacement without regard to hull shape, so today I started to look at using the line drawing from sailboatdata.com to get a more accurate shape and quickly noticed several things.

  1. The G32 has a transom, not a canoe stern, which means the waterplane aft is wider (and draft is less).  (and I need a different hull generator tool!)
  2. Profile view shows deepest draft forward of side windows, near ballast tank?  Draft appears to be deeper than the eight inch spec (0.67 ft / 0.20 m), closer to one foot?
  3. Though not shown in end view, hull beam looks wider than 1.5 feet?  So maybe not 22:1 LB ratio?

I'm curious too about what the real PPI/waterplane numbers are for the G32.  It's a marvelous design.  Why were the molds destroyed?

This CAD hull shown below has Beam WL (Bwl) = 1.76(!), LB ratio = 18, Cp = 0.63, Waterplane Area = 39.7, PPI = 214 lbs/inch (per hull).
That's only 2.8 inches extra draft at full ballast.

G32_plan_view_2020Jul22.thumb.png.428b67597927b90fc399a54cbf94a491.png

G32_profile_view_2020Jul22.thumb.png.0f2cec06e58633c1bc26f826dff91528.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mikey Don’t Like Sh*t said:

Does anyone know of a G32 for sale?  Preferably on the east coast.

There was one for sale in Maine awhile ago. It was posted on the Facebook page

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great thread, very kewl boat!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DOH!!!  Was about to post this when I realized I've made the same mistake three times!  :(  This hull below and both hulls I referred to above are 1,100 lbs. displacement (the whole G32!), whereas they should be half of that, 550 lbs. each hull.  OOPS.  I'll post this anyway with strikethough font treatment on erroneous bits.

I found these images on Russell's G32 blog showing what I called a "transom", only wide enough for kick-up rudder cases:

DSCN1768.jpg.2d426a65f087d0c751113e284ecbd596.jpgDSCN1767.jpg.cbae6cc1e736f278ae9b6401b76492a0.jpg

316327108_DSC_1699(1).jpg.ea9e3013a3e904af80cf450255905a39.jpg

So I reached for another proa hull generator in my quiver and came up with this hull.  Not saying it's the same as the G32, esp. because the COB is centered in a proa (the mast is centered on the G32, by the way)Similar numbers in some respects though:

LB ratio = 22:1, Beam WL (Bwl) = 1.46 feet, Draft = 0.67 feet (8"), Cp = 0.62, Waterplane Area = 33 sq feet, PPI = 177 lbs/inch (per hull).  That's  3.4 inches extra draft at full ballast?

G32_profile_view_2020Jul22b.thumb.gif.8145ad262357869cb9dbe74caafeb0ab.gif

G32_profile_view_2020Jul22d.thumb.png.1288c30880fb4bcb7ee3bcdd247c75f2.png

G32_profile_view_2020Jul22c.thumb.png.19bfb3d19bb170791b4e1e029496a668.png 

Rhino CAD model: proa32_G32_2020Jul22b.3dm

Interesting to contemplate a proa this size... near the minimum practical length for voyaging as far as I'm concerned (not to change the subject).  Would probably consider the extra ~3" of draft as standard for the proa main hull...  (this is when I realized my error, imagining a 32 foot proa with the same displacement as the G32...)

Long time, no sailing, so sorry about the misinfo.  Cheers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just drew out the waterplane with a 2 inch transom using 22:1 L/B. Waterplane area was 2.97m2 (32ft2), not 2.6 metres. So PPI  is 170lbs/inch per hull. So 300/170 = 1.76 inches immersion per hull for a total of 600 lbs water ballast.

As an aside, I would love to know the real (weighed) ready to sail weight. I suspect that it is a lot more than 1100 lbs.The lightest ALL carbon SeaCart 30 I could find on the MOCRA  website was more than double that:

 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxtb2NyYXJhdGluZzJ8Z3g6NDc4Y2I3NTVmMWFkMzQzNw

There are lots of (hulls only Grainger) racing cats around that size on the OMR ratings site that are nowhere near 1100 lbs, most are more than double.....even when a lot smaller.

A G32 owner needs to get a MOCRA/OMR certificate........

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ProaSailor said:

Why were the molds destroyed?

I think the boat was costing them money to build, so why keep a mold for something that doesn't make you money?

Share this post


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

Just drew out the waterplane with a 2 inch transom using 22:1 L/B. Waterplane area was 2.97m2 (32ft2), not 2.6 metres. So PPI  is 170lbs/inch per hull. So 300/170 = 1.76 inches immersion per hull for a total of 600 lbs water ballast.

As an aside, I would love to know the real (weighed) ready to sail weight. I suspect that it is a lot more than 1100 lbs.The lightest ALL carbon SeaCart 30 I could find on the MOCRA  website was more than double that:

 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxtb2NyYXJhdGluZzJ8Z3g6NDc4Y2I3NTVmMWFkMzQzNw

There are lots of (hulls only Grainger) racing cats around that size on the OMR ratings site that are nowhere near 1100 lbs, most are more than double.....even when a lot smaller.

A G32 owner needs to get a MOCRA/OMR certificate........

 

 

 

I think a stock boat is around 1800 lbs. That's what I heard from Greg Bull, I think. I hate to speculate on such things and really need to weigh mine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russell,  nice new rudders.  I loved having a boat that left no wake.   Watch the PT videos.  The hulls. are not formulaic.  The. weight isn't there because  the surface area. is kept to the bare minimum, by not needing a big rig you just knife delightfully along.   It is a gentle induced speed,  kind of like a hull surf board.   You are not pushing through.  the water but rather being sucked forward by the shape of the hull foil.    Ever watch a fish staying in the same place in a rapid?  The concept of induction is one of the coolest powers to investigate[capillary action, solar thermal reaction{wind}. and on and on. 

 

 

 

 

p

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

I think the boat was costing them money to build, so why keep a mold for something that doesn't make you money?

Meade mentioned the molds were destroyed after they contemplated making a G32 kit boat where you could buy a hull and finish the boat yourself at a lower price, but fearing of liability issues of boats not being finished properly in addition to the windmill blade plant was closing (where they were building the G32 "on the side." ) They abandoned production.  There's a video out there of Meade calling the windmill blade factory a 2 million dollar lesson in Risk management.  

The windmill blade factory is also a pretty good story, they worked with NASA to study a Douglass Fur epoxy composite laminate used in the blade's construction. Believe it or not there are space craft in use today that literally have wood epoxy structure parts due to their strength and cost advantages.  

Que the Andy Griffith "Salvage 1" pop culture reference.... Now... 

He also mentioned their break even point was 50 boats.  After talking to them about the boat I got the impression they focused on making the hull they were caught off guard at all of the custom parts cost. There's so many custom mechanisms and systems on that boat that are so unique and work remarkably well. The water ballast,  steering system, the mast step.. the bowsprit.. so much detail work,  and it's all exceptional.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love the story, THANKS:

Met with Jan and Meade during a DN Worlds in Germany. Has it been 1984? and later on Lake Geneva, (?) USA. Got into the composite trade later and built my own biz. Now being a happy "camper", retired and have toys to play with. All due to their ideas with the wood epoxy technology, which suited my abilities much better, other than the Marine electronics business which I had been in before my composite career. Thanks again to this great reminder story.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ProaSailor said:

DOH!!!  Was about to post this when I realized I've made the same mistake three times!  :(  This hull below and both hulls I referred to above are 1,100 lbs. displacement (the whole G32!), whereas they should be half of that, 550 lbs. each hull.  OOPS.  I'll post this anyway with strikethough font treatment on erroneous bits.

I found these images on Russell's G32 blog showing what I called a "transom", only wide enough for kick-up rudder cases:

DSCN1768.jpg.2d426a65f087d0c751113e284ecbd596.jpgDSCN1767.jpg.cbae6cc1e736f278ae9b6401b76492a0.jpg

316327108_DSC_1699(1).jpg.ea9e3013a3e904af80cf450255905a39.jpg

So I reached for another proa hull generator in my quiver and came up with this hull.  Not saying it's the same as the G32, esp. because the COB is centered in a proa (the mast is centered on the G32, by the way)Similar numbers in some respects though:

LB ratio = 22:1, Beam WL (Bwl) = 1.46 feet, Draft = 0.67 feet (8"), Cp = 0.62, Waterplane Area = 33 sq feet, PPI = 177 lbs/inch (per hull).  That's  3.4 inches extra draft at full ballast?

G32_profile_view_2020Jul22b.thumb.gif.8145ad262357869cb9dbe74caafeb0ab.gif

G32_profile_view_2020Jul22d.thumb.png.1288c30880fb4bcb7ee3bcdd247c75f2.png

G32_profile_view_2020Jul22c.thumb.png.19bfb3d19bb170791b4e1e029496a668.png 

Rhino CAD model: proa32_G32_2020Jul22b.3dm

Interesting to contemplate a proa this size... near the minimum practical length for voyaging as far as I'm concerned (not to change the subject).  Would probably consider the extra ~3" of draft as standard for the proa main hull...  (this is when I realized my error, imagining a 32 foot proa with the same displacement as the G32...)

Long time, no sailing, so sorry about the misinfo.  Cheers.

I've always loved proas.. I wanted to build one (or some kind of multihull) for a while before scoring the G32 jackpot. Good thing too, because working on Janet C taught me that It would have taken me forever to build a boat from scratch. I tended to have to do some of the harder tasks twice because the first time result was often adequate but ugly. And the second time would at least look like I had done this kind of work before ;)

It sounded funnier in my head. 

Share this post


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

The hulls. are not formulaic.  The. weight isn't there because  the surface area. is kept to the bare minimum, by not needing a big rig you just knife delightfully along.   It is a gentle induced speed,  kind of like a hull surf board.   You are not pushing through.  the water but rather being sucked forward by the shape of the hull foil.    Ever watch a fish staying in the same place in a rapid?  The concept of induction is one of the coolest powers to investigate[capillary action, solar thermal reaction{wind}. and on and on. 

Heh, heh, very poetic but not particularly useful from an engineering point of view.  Sounds like you believe some magic is involved?

Too many unknowns (Bwl, Draft, real Displacement, ballast "sinkage") for me to speculate much further, except to say that a 32 foot hull with LB ratio = 22 (Bwl = 1.45 feet) and draft of eight inches (0.67 feet) displacing only 550 pounds is rather unusual.  Would love to see an actual lines drawing of this hull and see if the COB moves forward when ballast is added?

By the way, how deep is the water in the ballast tanks when they are full?  In other words, if the hull sinks 3 inches, does that limit the depth of the ballast tank?  Seventy gallons of water ballast is 9.4 cubic feet (3' X 3' X 1' deep).  That's fairly large for a small hull, and deeper than anyone has suggested for "sinkage" (which is probably closer to six inches than three inches?).

Share this post


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

Heh, heh, very poetic but not particularly useful from an engineering point of view.  Sounds like you believe some magic is involved?

Too many unknowns (Bwl, Draft, real Displacement, ballast "sinkage") for me to speculate much further, except to say that a 32 foot hull with LB ratio = 22 (Bwl = 1.45 feet) and draft of eight inches (0.67 feet) displacing only 550 pounds is rather unusual.  Would love to see an actual lines drawing of this hull and see if the COB moves forward when ballast is added?

By the way, how deep is the water in the ballast tanks when they are full?  In other words, if the hull sinks 3 inches, does that limit the depth of the ballast tank?  Seventy gallons of water ballast is 9.4 cubic feet (3' X 3' X 1' deep).  That's fairly large for a small hull, and deeper than anyone has suggested for "sinkage" (which is probably closer to six inches than three inches?).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JanetC Gougeon32 said:

 

https://images.app.goo.gl/fGXBi5Us6eTK5Dtm8

This might give you some idea. The ballast tanks have an "overfill" tube so pressure doesn't build up when filling the tanks which end up blowing holes in the side of the boat -a theory which may account for some of Janet's structural fortifications.  Ya... the stories are priceless!! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, JanetC Gougeon32 said:

https://images.app.goo.gl/fGXBi5Us6eTK5Dtm8

This might give you some idea

Some idea of what?  The G32 secret sauce remains hidden unless someone cares to share specific answers and/or pics.

Looks to me like displacement (and COB) might be shifted forward by the deepest point of the keel rocker?  Where is the COG of the full water ballast relative to the hull COB when it's empty of ballast?

In "top view", what is the cross-sectional area of one ballast tank?  And how deep does it get when full?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, ProaSailor said:

Some idea of what?  The G32 secret sauce remains hidden unless someone cares to share specific answers and/or pics.

Looks to me like displacement (and COB) might be shifted forward by the deepest point of the keel rocker?  Where is the COG of the full water ballast relative to the hull COB when it's empty of ballast?

In "top view", what is the cross-sectional area of one ballast tank?  And how deep does it get when full?

Ahh.. that explains why lee helm develops when flying bigger screechers with water ballast.. 

Never thought of that. That would have never occurred to me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, JanetC Gougeon32 said:

Never thought of that.

Well, I never thought of that  either.  I have more questions than answers.

There are two aspects to "displacement (and COB) might be shifted forward" that I was trying to explain:

  1. Static - The beam/draft/length criteria make it difficult to draw such a low displacement hull unless it is deeper at one end (forward in this case?) than the other.
  2. Dynamic - Filling the ballast tanks might shift the boat's COB forward, or might not.  That's still a question, and I don't know the location, shape and height of the ballast tank?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, JanetC Gougeon32 said:

Ahh.. that explains why lee helm develops when flying bigger screechers with water ballast.

I would expect to get leehelm with a big screecher up regardless of waterballast, although it may become more noticeable with waterballast, depending on its location and how it affects trim?

@ProaSailor I don’t know the tank arrangements on a G32, but using a half ellipse (almost semi circle) which fits the 22:1 beam and 9inch depths, and allowing for some length and sectional tapering, you should be able to get 9.4 ft3 in a 2 metre, say 7 ft long tank just to waterline. Anything above waterline would shorten the tank length required?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

using a half ellipse (almost semi circle) which fits the 22:1 beam and 9inch depths, and allowing for some length and sectional tapering, you should be able to get 9.4 ft3 in a 2 metre, say 7 ft long tank just to waterline. Anything above waterline would shorten the tank length required?

This sounds sensible but I can't make it work.  For one thing, LB = 22:1 dictates a 1.45 foot beam (32 / 22) so an ellipse of that width would use 1.45 / 2 = ~0.73 as R1 and the draft (0.67 feet or 8") as R2, which is close to a circle.  Half of it's area (below the waterline) is 0.77 sq feet (according to Rhino Grasshopper) so the tank would need to be 12.2 feet long (9.4 / 0.77), or longer if tapered, and eight inches or more deep.

But the main issue is still getting only 550 lbs. displacement with such a large cross-section and hull length?

Obviously it all works beautifully, as intended, so it's fun to appreciate some of the considerations and details that were so clearly mastered by the designer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, ProaSailor said:

This sounds sensible but I can't make it work.  For one thing, LB = 22:1 dictates a 1.45 foot beam (32 / 22) so an ellipse of that width would use 1.45 / 2 = ~0.73 as R1 and the draft (0.67 feet or 8") as R2, which is close to a circle.  Half of it's area (below the waterline) is 0.77 sq feet (according to Rhino Grasshopper) so the tank would need to be 12.2 feet long (9.4 / 0.77), or longer if tapered, and eight inches or more deep.

But the main issue is still getting only 550 lbs. displacement with such a large cross-section and hull length?

Obviously it all works beautifully, as intended, so it's fun to appreciate some of the considerations and details that were so clearly mastered by the designer.

I don't think you'll find anyone disagreeing with you. They are heavier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, ProaSailor said:

This sounds sensible but I can't make it work

You are right. I incorrectly used 300 lbs ballast instead of 600 lbs. to keep the tank down to 7 ft length, you would need to make the tank top 6 inches above water level. Apologies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to ask but... how many freedom dollars ($$$) does one of these puppies tend to go for?

(Ranges are fine if you don't want to disclose that incredible deal you got...)

Share this post


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

I hate to ask but... how many freedom dollars ($$$) does one of these puppies tend to go for?

(Ranges are fine if you don't want to disclose that incredible deal you got...)

I hope I never have to find out ;)

 

Share this post


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

I hate to ask but... how many freedom dollars ($$$) does one of these puppies tend to go for?

(Ranges are fine if you don't want to disclose that incredible deal you got...)

The one I inquired about a while back was in the 30k range and it did need some work. There was also one for sale a few years ago in BC that was listed a bit cheaper than that. The boat in BC sold very quickly.

Share this post


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

I hate to ask but... how many freedom dollars ($$$) does one of these puppies tend to go for?

(Ranges are fine if you don't want to disclose that incredible deal you got...)

In 1990 dollars... from here: http://www.gougeon.com/prosetepoxy/G-32/welcome.html

Quote

My brother, Jan, and I had long thought there would be a large market for a lightweight, trailerable catamaran that was fast, fun to sail, had weekend accommodations for 2 or 3 and was priced below $35,000. We had no intention of achieving large production; if we could arrange to build two per week we could accomplish our financial goals, three per week would be profitable.

They built a total of only 14 G32s.

Share this post


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

In 1990 dollars... from here: http://www.gougeon.com/prosetepoxy/G-32/welcome.html

They built a total of only 14 G32s.

All up they were 38k according to the paperwork - they were trying to produce a cheaper to make, faster to setup, faster on the racecourse, easier to launch multi when compared to the F27, which was the multi market benchmark in the late 80s when the boat was designed. 

And they stack up against more modern designs remarkably well - quite a bit of bang for the buck - once they are squared away.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, hannibalhouse said:

The one in Maine (Facebook) appears to be available for $25,000.  I am enjoying this thread.

I thought that one sold a while ago.

That's hull 2, and had some unique quirks, like no windows for example, which in some ways is desirable.. take it from the guy with the most windows in a G32. The  space spider windows were Meade's idea, and he said an old Russian hovercraft was the inspiration. I used to have a picture of it, but that was years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, hannibalhouse said:

The one in Maine (Facebook) appears to be available for $25,000.  I am enjoying this thread.

I've seen lots of photos of that boat as friends are buying it. It does have windows and it does have lots of issues. I think hull # 2 is right. Lots of things changed (and were made better) after that one. 

 

Share this post


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

I've seen lots of photos of that boat as friends are buying it. It does have windows and it does have lots of issues. I think hull # 2 is right. Lots of things changed (and were made better) after that one. 

 

Sweet! 

I must be misremembering - I thought the side and front windows were painted on, but it had the small open hatch in the bow. Glad to hear hull 2 found a good home :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Proa, most of the appeal of magic shapes in motion cannot be arrived at without experience gained first hand.    I have worked for many gifted designers, they all had beautiful wives.  " Some times a cigar is just a cigar" S.F.   Thanks for all your computer help.  It's fun to see  you try to quantify nonlinear objects.  If I still. had my G32  we could go play.   If I remember right, when we used the water ballast she dropped about 2" and the CLR stayed about the same. The motion forward seemed to speed up and smooth out.   The whole business of understanding dissimilar motions that bring us pleasure is pretty cool stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoever wrote that couldn't have been talking about a G-32. The G-32 has a teensy rig. I could capsize mine in about 8 knots of wind, but that's part of what makes it such a great ride. I'm sure I'll tip mine over soon by accident, but so far only on purpose and by a running backstay failure.

Share this post


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

Whoever wrote that couldn't have been talking about a G-32. The G-32 has a teensy rig. I could capsize mine in about 8 knots of wind, but that's part of what makes it such a great ride. I'm sure I'll tip mine over soon by accident, but so far only on purpose and by a running backstay failure.

You are probably right. Maybe he was talking about the R33? I was clumsily trying to illustrate the potential advantages of taking the path discussed in the quote. 

I've tipped over a few times, some due to parts breaking (my new screecher broke the original carbon fiber sprit) and losing a side stay at an inopportune moment, but I came from sailing monohulls for decades. so this notion my max righting moment being around 10 degrees of heel was new to me. I use the water ballast alot more now and haven't had any issues.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/25/2020 at 10:26 AM, guerdon said:

Proa, most of the appeal of magic shapes in motion cannot be arrived at without experience gained first hand.    I have worked for many gifted designers, they all had beautiful wives.  " Some times a cigar is just a cigar" S.F.   Thanks for all your computer help.  It's fun to see  you try to quantify nonlinear objects.  If I still. had my G32  we could go play.   If I remember right, when we used the water ballast she dropped about 2" and the CLR stayed about the same. The motion forward seemed to speed up and smooth out.   The whole business of understanding dissimilar motions that bring us pleasure is pretty cool stuff.

The G32 underwater hull shape reminds me of a Tornado hull. Didn't the Gougeon brothers build a few tornadoes using a stressform plywood technique?  Tapering the end of a stressform hull might produce a similar shape. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard that the G-32's underwater shapes were splashed from one of Ollie's ama's, which are tortured plywood. 

The history of how the G-32 came about is a bit fuzzy.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russell, that explains. the shape, it doesn't have the fullness of a Tornado. [which. is also an inspired 'poetic' design.  The part that became my favorite. was the bow, then the flow down to the stern, it's as close to a kiss as any line could be.  It's just hot rod magic,  with no pretense of history or concern for the egos of the "leaders" .   "You see what you are."  Jan solved a problem, and moved on to more fun.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, guerdon said:

Russell, that explains. the shape,

It's interesting information but unless you have hull lines for Ollie's ama, it explains nothing as far as I'm concerned.
These classic designs (Ollie and G32) are more than thirty years old, what is the point of keeping their lines secret?

12-Ollie1.thumb.jpg.28a90aa179174cf9c45a8602bc840c70.jpg

908d.jpg.d0178a0ef667c8fa85a63cdbef1fbc04.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Proa, thanks for the music.   Many magic hulls were not drawn, they were carved, and then lines were "taken off" the models. as they were sawed into sections[stations] or disassembled  from lift sections that were screwed together. horizontally[plain stations].   I am just guessing, but many of the watercraft I made from developed plywood had no" Plans"  just a profile of the expanded sides that were joined at the bottom, and forced into a pleasing self-faring shape.  The WEST book has a chapter on it.  Put on the Spoonful and look at the hull of wonderful Moore24 which was expanded with 2x4 bracing "till it looked just right".  Many cool things are made with the logic of jazz music.  I guess I just suffer from a personality disorder that loves the Devine, and is incapable of quantifying it to further understand its' power.  Play the music, not the notes.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites