K9u20

Older well known IOR Boats

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, BOI Guy said:

I pulled it in and trimmed it, thats the job isn't it?

Does that make me a rock star too?

Watched some guys on a couple of TP52's have a pissing contest at the dock a couple of months ago, hauling man up the mast, what a bunch of pussies. All you could hear was the wine of the electric winch.

We could get 8 men linked up on the grinders, would have left them for dead, young guns would shit themselves going up like that these days.

4 guys on a 12M would lift the forward hand to the masthead in 8 seconds!

And that was with "vortex generators"  otherwise described as outward pointing rivets every couple of inches up both sides of the mast.  Did wonders for the inner thighs.  just occasionally mast/grinder ain't the worst spot to be.

Brought him down nearly as quick by having him roll into the main & opening letting go the halyard,  one turn on the winch to stop him about 5 feet above the boom.  Nylon jocks would melt on the way down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Richard2249 said:

On the topic of busy foredeck crews, I reckon this is a great shot - really looks like the bowman's got a bit on, regardless of whether the boat's approaching a wing mark or bottom mark.

Anyone know which boat this is out of interest?

Blooper action.jpg

That’s a shit show waiting to happen.

Share this post


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

4 guys on a 12M would lift the forward hand to the masthead in 8 seconds!

And that was with "vortex generators" otherwise described as outward pointing rivets every couple of inches up both sides of the mast.  Did wonders for the inner thighs.  just occasionally mast/grinder ain't the worst spot to be.

Brought him down nearly as quick by having him roll into the main & opening letting go the halyard,  one turn on the winch to stop him about 5 feet above the boom.  Nylon jocks would melt on the way down.

Lars Bergstrom and his B&R rig design was a big advocate of vortex generators....he was the co designer of the Windex and the of his ideas in the 60's and 70's can be seen on modern hi tech sailboats as the engineering /materials caught up to his dream...he and his partner the "R" in B&R was Sven Ridder , both were aeronautical engineers 

IMG_0051.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, BravoBravo said:

Lars Bergstrom and his B&R rig design was a big advocate of vortex generators....he was the co designer of the Windex and the of his ideas in the 60's and 70's can be seen on modern hi tech sailboats as the engineering /materials caught up to his dream...he and his partner the "R" in B&R was Sven Ridder , both were aeronautical engineers 

IMG_0051.jpg

Didn't Evolution, the Craig Walters 30' 1 tonner owned by Tony Johnson, ie Competition Sails,  have those?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sov at the helm, AC83.

1017758879_LocuraMarkSoverellAC83.thumb.jpg.a5e19dabb522d8d4972a6a4c25d4e2ed.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, cms said:

Sov at the helm, AC83.

1017758879_LocuraMarkSoverellAC83.thumb.jpg.a5e19dabb522d8d4972a6a4c25d4e2ed.jpg

 

....and Shenandoah to weather.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, sledracr said:

.and Shenandoah to weather.

At a start if I remember. The whole fleet started together in those days.

Share this post


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

Sov at the helm, AC83.

1017758879_LocuraMarkSoverellAC83.thumb.jpg.a5e19dabb522d8d4972a6a4c25d4e2ed.jpg

Love the oh shit handles on the tiller. Good old days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Diva and Charisma in the same series. Also Container, Too Impetuous, Hitchhiker, Caiman and ?? Diva was the sensation of the year, but had a few bad moments including the famously photographed Brambles grounding. Steered by Yves Pajot. Top boat was Magistri from our Canadian team (I was on Charisma) and I sold her to Sweden doubling up on having done the same with Swuzzlebubble two years before.

83.thumb.jpg.56f18bb8b1658049ae06c64019c68640.jpg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SF Woody Sailor said:

Charisma is a splendid name for a boat. 

Names....something that is missing in today's racing , something about a custom or dedicated race boat that is completely missing today, well to the masses  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, ROADKILL666 said:

Love the oh shit handles on the tiller. Good old days.

 

1 hour ago, cms said:

Sov at the helm, AC83.

1017758879_LocuraMarkSoverellAC83.thumb.jpg.a5e19dabb522d8d4972a6a4c25d4e2ed.jpg

I loved that boat!

Share this post


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

What TP52's have an electric winch? 

Come to think of it.  What TP52's even have space for an electric winch? 

 

However, if you could get the winch motors to also droop hike on the beats, some MedCup program manager might think about it.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Sov at the helm, AC83.

1017758879_LocuraMarkSoverellAC83.thumb.jpg.a5e19dabb522d8d4972a6a4c25d4e2ed.jpg

That's a cockpit designed around a Starboat driver.  Hydraulic pump right there, traveler right there, hatch to yell at the navigator right there, repeaters right there, runner winch and checkstay cascade right there.  

Share this post


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

Sov at the helm, AC83.

1017758879_LocuraMarkSoverellAC83.thumb.jpg.a5e19dabb522d8d4972a6a4c25d4e2ed.jpg

Looking at that photo, I assume the helmsman's feet are in a "hole" barely big enough for someone to stand in, between a midline locker/hatch(?) and the side deck.  That just seems like a nice place to break a leg, should things go sideways.

Share this post


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

What TP52's have an electric winch? 

Come to think of it.  What TP52's even have space for an electric winch?

Old ones.

Share this post


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

Diva and Charisma in the same series. Also Container, Too Impetuous, Hitchhiker, Caiman and ?? Diva was the sensation of the year, but had a few bad moments including the famously photographed Brambles grounding. Steered by Yves Pajot. Top boat was Magistri from our Canadian team (I was on Charisma) and I sold her to Sweden doubling up on having done the same with Swuzzlebubble two years before.

83.thumb.jpg.56f18bb8b1658049ae06c64019c68640.jpg

What kind of boat was Diva?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/10/2020 at 8:53 AM, SF Woody Sailor said:

Corollary question: I have been thinking about picking up a second hand blooper for my boat (36 footer). Would I be able to find any bowmen or bowchicks in the SF Bay area who know how to buoy race a blooper? Or are they extinct?

War Dog. Or me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, ROADKILL666 said:

What kind of boat was Diva?

Joubert/Nivelt 1-Ton

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Joubert/Nivelt 1-Ton

Thanks.Now I have proof.My dad and I had a bet from the 80s on what she was.Now to get him to pay up .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Diva was built for Bernard Moureau by Hervé in la Rochelle. She was a genuine breakthrough boat, opening the way for the wave of one tonners that followed from Andrieu, Briand, Judel/Vrolijk and eventually most designers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/13/2020 at 9:30 PM, ROADKILL666 said:

That’s a shit show waiting to happen.

Back when bowmen where gods.

Now they whinge if that have to peel an Asso in  over 15 knots.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/13/2020 at 12:56 PM, Richard2249 said:

On the topic of busy foredeck crews, I reckon this is a great shot - really looks like the bowman's got a bit on, regardless of whether the boat's approaching a wing mark or bottom mark.

Anyone know which boat this is out of interest?

Blooper action.jpg

for the post before

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ROADKILL666 said:

Thanks.Now I have proof.My dad and I had a bet from the 80s on what she was.Now to get him to pay up .

Do I get a "finder's fee"?  A bet made in the 80's should have more than doubled now w/inflation! ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, lydia said:

Back when bowmen where gods.

Now they whinge if that have to peel an Asso in  over 15 knots.

Preach to me.whiney little baby’s 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/12/2020 at 10:56 PM, Richard2249 said:

On the topic of busy foredeck crews, I reckon this is a great shot - really looks like the bowman's got a bit on, regardless of whether the boat's approaching a wing mark or bottom mark.

Anyone know which boat this is out of interest?

Blooper action.jpg

 

 

That's an awesome shot!!!  Do you have one of that zoomed out just a bit??  I would love to make a letter sized print of that pic....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, JoeO said:

Do I get a "finder's fee"?  A bet made in the 80's should have more than doubled now w/inflation! ;-)

It for 20.00 in the 80s so I am going to tell him 100.00 that should be a laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, lydia said:

Back when bowmen where gods.

Now they whinge if that have to peel an Asso in  over 15 knots.

Though that environment was admirably geared towards killing us all.

200w_d.gif 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, shaggybaxter said:

Though that environment was admirably geared towards killing us all.

200w_d.gif 

Awe come on...most of us made it. A bit scarred and war torn. But, we made it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My daughter wears a shirt that says

IMORTAL

(so far)

 

All of us that are still here made it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ROADKILL666 said:

It for 20.00 in the 80s so I am going to tell him 100.00 that should be a laugh.

It should be $200.

If he gives you attitude, tell him to name 5 things that don't cost 10X what they did when you made the bet. ;)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/13/2020 at 12:54 PM, Somebody Else said:

Old ones.

Barely, and only if the crew wore hardhats when digging sails out from aft.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, TUBBY said:

My daughter wears a shirt that says

IMORTAL

(so far)

 

All of us that are still here made it!

I hope your daughter can spell better than that.

 

Guy jumps off the Empire State building.  Halfway down he says to himself, "So far, so good."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep & so can the printer!

My fingers (well finger),  not so well.  Typos are expected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/13/2020 at 5:54 AM, BravoBravo said:

Lars Bergstrom and his B&R rig design was a big advocate of vortex generators... he and his partner the "R" in B&R was Sven Ridder , both were aeronautical engineers 

IMG_0051.jpg

The vortex generators are too far aft on this rig. Clearly, they might have been aeronautical engineers, but they did not do their due diligence in reading the technical papers of the day.

Here is the paper they should have read. I did. In fact, I was in the audience at the AIAA Aero/Hydronautics of Sailing conference when Gentry presented this paper. He brought along the wind tunnel test articles shown in pictures in the paper.

http://gentrysailing.com/pdf-theory/Studies-of-Mast-Section-Aerodynamics.pdf

"This is because the peak-velocity point on the mast is always forward of the maximum width point ... the boundary layer is tripped to turbulent, the flow will separate at the peak velocity point."

Therefore, the boundary layer has already tripped BEFORE getting to the vortex generators. Hence, the vortex generators in the above picture were simply weight aloft.

"If the boundary layer could be made to trip from the laminar state to the turbulent state before the peak velocity is reached, then it would stay attached longer."

The peak velocity is roughly where the mast is thickest when looking at it from the apparent wind, 30 degrees to the side. Not from directly ahead. Hence, the strips needed to be forward about two or three widths of those rivet-strips to have any aero effect.

If anyone actually reads that paper, on page 6 there is a section called "B" that was used on Kindred Spirit, originally owned by Bob Barton (perhaps hence the "B"). Kindred Spirit was a very early Peterson one tonner that was 4th in the One Ton Nationals in about 1975, and then owned by Milt and Marty Vogel for several years. I raced that boat both with the "B" section and later with a modern section (way better).

The G4 section in the paper, as used on Courageous, has the characteristics we commonly see in high performance masts today: a flat front, with "knuckles" where the curvature increases, and then flatter sides. This was soon shown to be nearly as good as the "vortex generators" without destroying sails or people going up the mast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob Barton isn’t a name you hear much! I worked for him at Horizon in the mid eighties. Very bright guy and an excellent sailer. The B&R rigs had hydraulic head and back stays for what, 1 or 2 years before they became illegal. The rig could rock In either direction.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

The vortex generators are too far aft on this rig. Clearly, they might have been aeronautical engineers, but they did not do their due diligence in reading the technical papers of the day.

Here is the paper they should have read. I did. In fact, I was in the audience at the AIAA Aero/Hydronautics of Sailing conference when Gentry presented this paper. He brought along the wind tunnel test articles shown in pictures in the paper.

http://gentrysailing.com/pdf-theory/Studies-of-Mast-Section-Aerodynamics.pdf

"This is because the peak-velocity point on the mast is always forward of the maximum width point ... the boundary layer is tripped to turbulent, the flow will separate at the peak velocity point."

Therefore, the boundary layer has already tripped BEFORE getting to the vortex generators. Hence, the vortex generators in the above picture were simply weight aloft.

"If the boundary layer could be made to trip from the laminar state to the turbulent state before the peak velocity is reached, then it would stay attached longer."

The peak velocity is roughly where the mast is thickest when looking at it from the apparent wind, 30 degrees to the side. Not from directly ahead. Hence, the strips needed to be forward about two or three widths of those rivet-strips to have any aero effect.

If anyone actually reads that paper, on page 6 there is a section called "B" that was used on Kindred Spirit, originally owned by Bob Barton (perhaps hence the "B"). Kindred Spirit was a very early Peterson one tonner that was 4th in the One Ton Nationals in about 1975, and then owned by Milt and Marty Vogel for several years. I raced that boat both with the "B" section and later with a modern section (way better).

The G4 section in the paper, as used on Courageous, has the characteristics we commonly see in high performance masts today: a flat front, with "knuckles" where the curvature increases, and then flatter sides. This was soon shown to be nearly as good as the "vortex generators" without destroying sails or people going up the mast.

There is also a good section on this in Ross Garrett's book " The Symmetry of Sailing".  An excellent read BTW.

Share this post


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

Diva was built for Bernard Moureau by Hervé in la Rochelle. She was a genuine breakthrough boat, opening the way for the wave of one tonners that followed from Andrieu, Briand, Judel/Vrolijk and eventually most designers.

Bernard Moureau is one to be remembered amongst the French racing owners.

Multiple boats owner ( I remember a Belmore derivative, a Monk of Malham sistership, two hot half tonners, The flush-deck First 42, Diva, Espace du Desir,  and others I've forgotten). he could be seen on many RORC starting lines or the odd Bermuda Race and, of course, Ton cups too.

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Sail12m said:

Bob Barton isn’t a name you hear much! I worked for him at Horizon in the mid eighties. Very bright guy and an excellent sailer. The B&R rigs had hydraulic head and back stays for what, 1 or 2 years before they became illegal. The rig could rock In either direction.

His brother is a very talented sailor too....Bill

Share this post


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

The vortex generators are too far aft on this rig. Clearly, they might have been aeronautical engineers, but they did not do their due diligence in reading the technical papers of the day.

Here is the paper they should have read. I did. In fact, I was in the audience at the AIAA Aero/Hydronautics of Sailing conference when Gentry presented this paper. He brought along the wind tunnel test articles shown in pictures in the paper.

http://gentrysailing.com/pdf-theory/Studies-of-Mast-Section-Aerodynamics.pdf

"This is because the peak-velocity point on the mast is always forward of the maximum width point ... the boundary layer is tripped to turbulent, the flow will separate at the peak velocity point."

Therefore, the boundary layer has already tripped BEFORE getting to the vortex generators. Hence, the vortex generators in the above picture were simply weight aloft.

"If the boundary layer could be made to trip from the laminar state to the turbulent state before the peak velocity is reached, then it would stay attached longer."

The peak velocity is roughly where the mast is thickest when looking at it from the apparent wind, 30 degrees to the side. Not from directly ahead. Hence, the strips needed to be forward about two or three widths of those rivet-strips to have any aero effect.

If anyone actually reads that paper, on page 6 there is a section called "B" that was used on Kindred Spirit, originally owned by Bob Barton (perhaps hence the "B"). Kindred Spirit was a very early Peterson one tonner that was 4th in the One Ton Nationals in about 1975, and then owned by Milt and Marty Vogel for several years. I raced that boat both with the "B" section and later with a modern section (way better).

The G4 section in the paper, as used on Courageous, has the characteristics we commonly see in high performance masts today: a flat front, with "knuckles" where the curvature increases, and then flatter sides. This was soon shown to be nearly as good as the "vortex generators" without destroying sails or people going up the mast.

the spar extrusion had a sight relief to accept the vortex generator tape thickness, so the placement is precisely where the wind tunnel conclusion called for them to be...that said they were about as effective as keel trim tabs......theoretical but impossible to experience results  when in use

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Sail12m said:

Bob Barton isn’t a name you hear much! I worked for him at Horizon in the mid eighties. Very bright guy and an excellent sailer. The B&R rigs had hydraulic head and back stays for what, 1 or 2 years before they became illegal. The rig could rock In either direction.

"Kindred Spirit" one tonner

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/15/2020 at 4:52 AM, BravoBravo said:

His brother is a very talented sailor too....Bill

The Bill Barton who sailed the Etchells? I crewed for him. He is sailing 110's out of Inverness now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/10/2020 at 8:53 AM, SF Woody Sailor said:

Corollary question: I have been thinking about picking up a second hand blooper for my boat (36 footer). Would I be able to find any bowmen or bowchicks in the SF Bay area who know how to buoy race a blooper? Or are they extinct?

War Dog. Or me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me too.  A blooper gybe right outside the StFYC is a thing of beauty for the spectators on the roof.  Unless it's not.

  • Like 6

Share this post


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

Me too.  A blooper gybe right outside the StFYC is a thing of beauty for the spectators on the roof.  Unless it's not.

Theire our to tipes of sailores oute theire, thoise thet no howe to gybe and thoise thet do notte...........               :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, P_Wop said:

Me too.  A blooper gybe right outside the StFYC is a thing of beauty for the spectators on the roof.  Unless it's not.

That is one you don't want to fuck up nowadays when every spectator has a camera.

I would prefer not to repeat this experience of gybing right in front of the St.FYC during BBS. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A pic from my early days...

That’s me in the after guard spot. Decision - Serendipity 43 (Peterson) built at Palmer Johnson. Dave Howell was the owner. This would have been ‘84 the year of my first Chi-Mac. By the end of 85 was doing foredeck full time. Still love the older boats... Got myself an ‘83 J/29 now. Not an IOR boat but an oldie but a goodie.

AE5702DE-CD12-4F40-93C5-4DC337B743B9.jpeg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Rhumb Runner said:

A pic from my early days...

That’s me in the after guard spot. Decision - Serendipity 43 (Peterson) built at Palmer Johnson. Dave Howell was the owner. This would have been ‘84 the year of my first Chi-Mac. By the end of 85 was doing foredeck full time. Still love the older boats... Got myself an ‘83 J/29 now. Not an IOR boat but an oldie but a goodie.

AE5702DE-CD12-4F40-93C5-4DC337B743B9.jpeg

Great times,  smiling faces racing against the likes of Vagary, Whiplash, and other notables during those days long ago, in a galaxy far far away.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Me too.  A blooper gybe right outside the StFYC is a thing of beauty for the spectators on the roof.  Unless it's not.

Oh I don't know-from the Race Deck at the Frantic the wipeouts are pretty enjoyable too 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh.  I remember one BBS I was doing bow on Native Son, and the whole romping reach across from Sausalito the guys in fantasy-land couldn't decide between a bear-away or a gibe-set at the mark in front of StFYC.  After changing their minds a few times, and me changing all the gear over each time, I finally called an audible and sat in the bow pulpit for the last 5 boatlengths or so with the bag in my lap and all the corners hooked up. 

When the bow passed the mark, I yelled "HOIST", threw a couple of armsfull of cloth up in the air, and ducked.  Had just enough time to think "this is either going to be really good or really bad".

It turned out really good.  Chute went straight up, filled with a "woooomf" before the stern cleared the mark, and I had a chance to admire it for a second before dawdling off the bow and hooking whichever guy turned out to be the right one into the pole on my way back to the mast.   Heard there was video of it but never saw it.  I just smiled as if it was just another day at the office.

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

Great times,  smiling faces racing against the likes of Vagary, Whiplash, and other notables during those days long ago, in a galaxy far far away.

 

2 hours ago, Rhumb Runner said:

A pic from my early days...

That’s me in the after guard spot. Decision - Serendipity 43 (Peterson) built at Palmer Johnson. Dave Howell was the owner. This would have been ‘84 the year of my first Chi-Mac. By the end of 85 was doing foredeck full time. Still love the older boats... Got myself an ‘83 J/29 now. Not an IOR boat but an oldie but a goodie.

AE5702DE-CD12-4F40-93C5-4DC337B743B9.jpeg

Man, amazing driving to get her nose down, did you recover from that mishap?  Remember the really good IOR drivers could keep the boat under the kite until the bow buried and slam bam the the boat snapped over to one side or the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the Bob Barton theme, here's a photo of Kindred Spirit and mast detail, not sure if that sheds any light on the discussion above, looks like a fairly simple, and beefy, extrusion. And an interesting article Bob wrote about the 1975 OTC.

One Ton 1975_Kindred Spirit_2_S Kelley.jpg

One Ton 1975_B Barton (1).jpg

One Ton 1975_B Barton (3).jpg

One Ton 1975_B Barton (2)_.jpg

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

20200416_144435.thumb.jpg.fcbb668a7c1c55212598bdaf06eb99a4.jpg

That is me sitting right in front of Marty on the helm. Good times!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/14/2020 at 3:28 PM, Tom O'Keefe said:

Awe come on...most of us made it. A bit scarred and war torn. But, we made it.

Perhaps time for Dry Armour to hear up for another production run?

 

post-1196-0-85038000-1479939937.jpg

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Zenmasterfred,

This showed up on my Wastebook feed:

 

Hagar.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well not well known...probably for the obvious 

 

ior2.jpg

iorr.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Maxx Baqustae said:

Hey Zenmasterfred,

This showed up on my Wastebook feed:

 

Hagar.jpg

Hagar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SF Woody Sailor said:

WTF?

This was an peculiar interpretation of the IOR, designed and built for the 1/2-ton world championship in 1983, in Hankø, Norway. Named Halving. Designed på famous Jan Herman Linge, it didn’t qualify.

Share this post


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

A pic from my early days...

That’s me in the after guard spot. Decision - Serendipity 43 (Peterson) built at Palmer Johnson. Dave Howell was the owner. This would have been ‘84 the year of my first Chi-Mac. By the end of 85 was doing foredeck full time. Still love the older boats... Got myself an ‘83 J/29 now. Not an IOR boat but an oldie but a goodie.

AE5702DE-CD12-4F40-93C5-4DC337B743B9.jpeg

Dave Howell was one of several skippers responsible for making me the sailor I am today. My first salty ocean race was an SORC aboard his PJ 37 one tonner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peculiar is right. What was the theory? It looks like a recipe to collect weeds, lobster pots etc. Although I suppose when I sailed the Oslo Fjord I don't remember too many weeds or lobster pots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really dumb idea.

Experimental aircraft have been built with forward swept wings to create dynamic instability so the computers could fly an incredibly twitchy aircraft.

image.png.062ff1262971e379c336f52115016cb9.png

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_X-29

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not my cup of tea but I actually applaud the owner and designer for pushing the envelope ....why to I keep thinking of the owners wife ...LOL...

Share this post


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

Yup.

Bob's Union Jack and Hagar.....two of my favorite PNW boats.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Really dumb idea.

Experimental aircraft have been built with forward swept wings to create dynamic instability so the computers could fly an incredibly twitchy aircraft.

image.png.062ff1262971e379c336f52115016cb9.png

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_X-29

The only dumb idea on that keel is the bulb on an IOR half ton.  Bulbs did not work under IOR - plus the fact that one has a really shitty bulb shape.

The forward swept foil is a good idea for several reasons:

- It generates inward spanwise flow which (in the absence of a bulb) reduces induced drag

- It tends to induce twist at the tip which generates more lift (although danger of stalling in aircraft)

- Moving the leading edge of the keel root aft of the point of maximum sectional area tends to reduce interference drag as it eliminates the "hump" a keel usually adds to the area curve (this is why racing boat designers like to have very thin short chord foil roots - to minimize the "hump").

I built a paper airplane years ago with forward swept wings (not totally folded, some cutting, taping and a paper clip for balance) People who saw it didn't believe it would fly but it flew further and straighter than any other one I ever came up with.  It looked a lot like a paper version of the X-29 but without the canards.

Of course kelp catching is a huge drawback if you sail in such an area.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 12 metre said:

- It tends to induce twist at the tip which generates more lift (although danger of stalling in aircraft)

 

 

It's going to twist the keel fin the wrong way to create lift.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask yourself why the later 12 meter (82 and 87) keels had such a shape. Nose was forward of the root.  It works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, A3A said:

It's going to twist the keel fin the wrong way to create lift.

Nope.  Aerodynamically a forward swept wing is superior especially at low speeds - structurally however it is a nightmare for aircraft due to the amount of lift and torsional loads it can generate

Below I copied and pasted from an aircraft modelling site: 

Forward Sweep and “Aeroelastic tailoring”

Air flowing over any swept wing tends to move spanwise towards the rearmost end of the wing. On a conventional rearward-swept wing, this is outwards towards the tip. But in a forward-swept wing, it is inwards towards the root. As a result, the dangerous tip stall condition of a backwards-swept design becomes a safer and more controllable root stall on a forward swept design. This allows full aileron control despite loss of lift and also means that drag-inducing leading edge slots or other devices are not required.

With the air flowing inwards, wingtip vortices and the accompanying drag are reduced, instead the fuselage acts as a very large wing fence and, since wings are generally larger at the root, this improves lift allowing a smaller wing. As a result maneuverability is improved, especially at high angles of attack

These were some of advantages which make the forward sweep look as a very attractive choice. However, the aeroelastic divergence issues made it uncommon. In a forward swept wing configuration, the aerodynamic lift produces a twisting force which rotates the wing leading edge upward. This will result in a higher angle of attack, which increases lift, twisting the wing further. This aeroelastic divergence can quickly lead to structural failure. With conventional metallic construction, a torsionally very stiff wing would be required to resist twisting; stiffening the wing adds weight, which may make the design unfeasible. But X-29 and Su 47 designs made use of Aeroelastic tailoring in which the anisotropic elastic coupling between bending and twisting of the carbon fiber composite material to address this aeroelastic effect. Rather than using a very stiff wing, which would carry a weight penalty, these planes used laminates which produced coupling between bending and torsion. As lift increases, bending loads force the wing tips to bend upward. Torsion loads attempt to twist the wing to higher angles of attack, but the coupling resists the loads, twisting the leading edge downward reducing wing angle of attack and lift. With lift reduced, the loads are reduced and divergence is avoided

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Ask yourself why the later 12 meter (82 and 87) keels had such a shape. Nose was forward of the root.  It works.

 True, but those were more inverted or "upside down" keels.  They had minimal if any sweep in either direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, 12 metre said:

Nope.  Aerodynamically a forward swept wing is superior especially at low speeds - structurally however it is a nightmare for aircraft due to the amount of lift and torsional loads it can generate

Below I copied and pasted from an aircraft modelling site: 

Forward Sweep and “Aeroelastic tailoring”

Air flowing over any swept wing tends to move spanwise towards the rearmost end of the wing. On a conventional rearward-swept wing, this is outwards towards the tip. But in a forward-swept wing, it is inwards towards the root. As a result, the dangerous tip stall condition of a backwards-swept design becomes a safer and more controllable root stall on a forward swept design. This allows full aileron control despite loss of lift and also means that drag-inducing leading edge slots or other devices are not required.

With the air flowing inwards, wingtip vortices and the accompanying drag are reduced, instead the fuselage acts as a very large wing fence and, since wings are generally larger at the root, this improves lift allowing a smaller wing. As a result maneuverability is improved, especially at high angles of attack

These were some of advantages which make the forward sweep look as a very attractive choice. However, the aeroelastic divergence issues made it uncommon. In a forward swept wing configuration, the aerodynamic lift produces a twisting force which rotates the wing leading edge upward. This will result in a higher angle of attack, which increases lift, twisting the wing further. This aeroelastic divergence can quickly lead to structural failure. With conventional metallic construction, a torsionally very stiff wing would be required to resist twisting; stiffening the wing adds weight, which may make the design unfeasible. But X-29 and Su 47 designs made use of Aeroelastic tailoring in which the anisotropic elastic coupling between bending and twisting of the carbon fiber composite material to address this aeroelastic effect. Rather than using a very stiff wing, which would carry a weight penalty, these planes used laminates which produced coupling between bending and torsion. As lift increases, bending loads force the wing tips to bend upward. Torsion loads attempt to twist the wing to higher angles of attack, but the coupling resists the loads, twisting the leading edge downward reducing wing angle of attack and lift. With lift reduced, the loads are reduced and divergence is avoided

Most interesting explanation 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a more light hearted note. GailForce a Dubois 42( cruising version of Vanguard) at the pre start of the 1982 China Sea Race.

GF 1982.JPG

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's up with the bowman?  Didn't he get one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, A3A said:

It's going to twist the keel fin the wrong way to create lift.

Depends on the amount of structural twist you are going to get out of a 4" section of lead.

Share this post


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

What's up with the bowman?  Didn't he get one?

She's probably already statched in the fore-peak

Share this post


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

She's probably already statched in the fore-peak

Owner's teenage daughter, no doubt.  Nestled down in the half ounce runner and waiting....

Share this post


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

Nestled down in the half ounce runner and waiting....

I always appreciated it when the owner brought along the pilot-berth cushions.  Arranged just right on the cabin sole, they made a nice comfy little play-pen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, BravoBravo said:

Well not well known...probably for the obvious 

 

ior2.jpg

iorr.jpg

Need a thread dedicated to weird ass boats or "innovative" interpretation of the rules.  It would be very interesting.  Looks like it was cruisified.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, some dude said:

Bingo sighting!

Heh.  You can always tell a boat that Dennis Choate built for his own use by the sail number.  It always reduces to an "8" (2+8+8+8 = 17, 1+7 = 8)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, sledracr said:

Heh.  You can always tell a boat that Dennis Choate built for his own use by the sail number.  It always reduces to an "8" (2+8+8+8 = 17, 1+7 = 8)

43433

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, some dude said:

43433

Yup.  That one and Blue Jacket (43100) got sail numbers from Area D (New Orleans, IIRC), even though the boats were in SoCal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites