Jump to content


Selfish: a boat that -I- would actually like


  • Please log in to reply
159 replies to this topic

#1 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,637 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 08 September 2013 - 04:44 PM

My wife says I'm too picky. Well,, she's been the biggest beneficiary of that, if true. However I just don't understand why so many people settle for boats that are such a flaming PITA. I've sailed a bunch of different boats and they're all too heavy, too slow, too complicated, take to long to rig/launch, etc etc.

 

When you start getting closer to the people who design & build boats, you start to understand why this is so. The designers/builders have a totally different set of priorities, of which the first obviously has to be that they need to make a living. But you see design after design that is intended to be .001kt faster than the last one, or have slightly cooler-shaped windows & a bigger head to make it easier to sell to non-sailing wives (while at the same time cutting down the cost to produce by 15%), etc etc. They could give less than a tiny rat's patooty how PRACTICAL the boat(s) are to use & sail.

 

Now some people really get off on that last hundredth-of-a-knot of speed. Fine, the advances made in design generally benefit us all in the long run. The endpoint is boats like the A-class cat, which look more like spaceships nowadays. Or the 505 with double adjustable carbon fiber -everything-. Cool yes but not what I want to park at my dock for an easy spur-of-the-moment afternoon daysail.

 

I happen to like self-bailing boats. Or self-draining boats, in other words a boat that the water will not collect in. Sloshing around your ankles, leaving the sheets and your lunch bag soaked in whatever you've been sailing in (generally not appetizing), dirt & mildew & a crust of salt always present. Plus you have to bail the friggin' thing while sailing. Sailing is fun. Bailing, while it is an elementary act of seamanship & builds character, is not fun.

 

There are lots of self-bailing boats, in fact I recently bought one to keep in the backyard and have really enjoyed sailing it (Capri Cyclone see thread here). Many including myself followed the Shaw 4.0 design/built thread, and while I think that's a nice enough boat it's a bit odd-looking and very expensive.

 

More recently there has been a discussion about home built singlehanders, at which I brought up my gripe about not being self bailing. I posted a brief on how it would be almost as easy to build a self-bailer as not, but it wasn't really much of a design.

 

This is much closer to a finished design. 13'6"or 4.15m LOA, I think the hull could built to weigh around 110 lbs and be plenty durable, stable enough to not be too tricky around docks, fast enough to be fun (I think the hull shown would plane like a sum-va-beech). Needs a cool name though.

 

Attached File  13ft 2-chine beach sailer DSK v1 DEMO 01.jpg   89.8K   12 downloads

 

Attached File  13ft 2-chine beach sailer DSK v1 DEMO01.jpg   82.27K   5 downloads

 

Attached File  13ft 2-chine beach sailer DSK v1 DEMO04.jpg   87.25K   6 downloads

 

Attached File  13ft 2-chine beach sailer DSK v1 DEMO08.jpg   76.01K   6 downloads

 

It also shouldn't be difficult to build. Here's a look at the frames & cockpit floor, plus 3 temporary frames to put the hull panels take the right shape (it might only need 2). The chine panels are wide enough that they could go on after the sides and still be able to reach inside for fit/finish work.

 

Attached File  13ft 2-chine beach sailer DSK v1 DEMO20.jpg   134.9K   2 downloads

 

Attached File  13ft 2-chine beach sailer DSK v1 DEMO21.jpg   140.97K   2 downloads

 

It's not as nice as some boats, for example Keither Callaghan's Hadron, but that's going to be a bigger & more expensive boat, more pieces to assemble, and it's not self-bailing (grumble grumble).

 

So! there it is

 

FB- Doug



#2 bruno

bruno

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,816 posts

Posted 08 September 2013 - 05:29 PM

nice, hope you try it, high boom?

#3 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,198 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 08 September 2013 - 05:49 PM

.

 

...nice work Flyer........steam-on! :)



#4 JimC

JimC

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,706 posts
  • Location:South East England
  • Interests:Dinghies, especially box rule classes.

Posted 08 September 2013 - 07:53 PM

Much as I like self draining boats to sail, I'm in the 'middle' of my second major rebuild of a self draining boat in the last few years, and both have been necessitated by the area under the floor being just perfect for rot to develop, I can't think why they should be worse than front tank and side tank boats, but my statistically insignificant sample causes me to think... Maybe TANSTAAFL?



#5 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,637 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 08 September 2013 - 08:09 PM

Much as I like self draining boats to sail, I'm in the 'middle' of my second major rebuild of a self draining boat in the last few years, and both have been necessitated by the area under the floor being just perfect for rot to develop, I can't think why they should be worse than front tank and side tank boats, but my statistically insignificant sample causes me to think... Maybe TANSTAAFL?

 

Is that in the C++ ?

Ironic, not only are a lot of people constantly saying the epoxy-coated wood can't possibly ever rot, but I've had pretty much every plywood boat I've ever had long-term experience with get soft spots and eventually rot around the landings of the frames, or pretty much any framing along the inner chines. Of course in a non-self-bailing boat it's much easier to reach those places.

 

This is a big reason why I'm just not enthusiastic about building boats with plywood. I'm not old enough to think that I won't have to rebuild them at some point. OTOH panel builds with foam seem to hold a lot of promise.

 

FB- Doug



#6 Phil S

Phil S

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,701 posts
  • Location:Sydney

Posted 08 September 2013 - 11:03 PM

I have had similar thoughts. So starting with existing popular boats look at what is good and not so good about each, and then try to design around the good bits. Talking single handed dinghies only:

 

My race choice is  a moth but there are days when there is not enough wind or the water is too cold to wade out to chest deep. But it is light enough to carry fullly rigged and I see that as a huge plus. Most people are scared off by the narrow hulls and foils.

 

All the so called skiffs with spinakers are way too complex, too much rigging time and too hard to right after a capsize once the spin is in the water. Also too heavy.

 

Laser is a good size, but too heavy, the rig is crap, dog slow but the class offers great racing.

 

The Shaw and many similar others look good but are a bit big, particularly too wide making it very difficult to get  the rudder and CB inplace before getting onboard, making them difficult to beach launch.

 

The IC is a beautiful boat to sail but is just too big to store and manage out of the water.

 

The Hoot looks to be going in the right direction but the wings add complexity and cost to the build.

 

The Contender has great performance from the trapeze, but is a huge boat to handle out of the water. Its a lot of boat to build.

 

Doug your drwaings also look a bit complex. Too much structure for a small boat.

 

So what would I design to try to pick as many good points as posibble:

 

To start with the hull would be no bigger than a laser in length and width, meaning it would store easilly and use minimal materials. It would have to be lighter, I know I could build a plywood boat lighter (My 17ft IC hull weighed 35kg so a similarly built 13ft boat would have to get close to 25kg) But most people would prefer glass/foam. We are talking racing sailors here who do not put their hulls on the ground. People who want to abuse boats can stick to their lasers. We are in the 21st century now, the chop strand polyester age is over.

 

The hull has to be able to be carried under one arm. Preferable for the whole boat to be able to be carried moth style into the water.

 

The shape would be flat, relaively narrow to get a good sharp bow, and with only slightly more freeboard than a laser to make hiking easier.

The rig would not be much different in size to a moth but conventional people will want a bolt rope. I think it has to have stays to be properly under control at reasonable weight and cost.

 

While many people fear trapezing, it is the simplest way and the cheapest way to get upwind performance.

 

So what have I got, a narrower lighter laser hull with a modern rig and a trapeze. Almost a hoot without the wings. If someone in Sydneys want to make a ply one I'll help them out but I have enough boats already and nowhere to store another one.



#7 lonbordin

lonbordin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29 posts
  • Location:Bloomington, IN
  • Interests:Surfing, Sailing, Snowboarding. In real life I'm David Wilcox a CISSP (IT Security) working for a mid-sized company.

Posted 08 September 2013 - 11:54 PM

I hear ya' Steam Flyer... I'm 6'4" and a solid 245lbs and the little people can't relate.  I've gone away from the search for the little dinghy.  I went with the two boat solution.

 

Force 5 for days that it's over 20 knots (still a bitch to fit under the vanged down boom).

E-Scow for everything else.  Finally a boat that doesn't give a F*ck about my size and gives as good as it gets.

 

I'd go for MC Scow but damn that boat is heavy... I have to winch out a single-seater?!  I'd rather choose a C scow if it comes to that.

 

Your design looks great... that sail is over 100 sqft, right? RIGHT!



#8 IC Nutter

IC Nutter

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts

Posted 09 September 2013 - 12:13 AM

Phil,

 

I agree with you. I think what you are describing is something similar to a Farr 3.7, but lighter and with a sharper hull. Do you have a hull drawn up for this? If not, I would like draw one. I like my Laser for it's convenience and I like my IC for its performance. Something that tries to get the best of both worlds would be cool. I've always liked the look of the Contender, but as you say, too big and heavy. Not saying that I would build one, but It would be a fun design exercise. The biggest challenge I think is to design for a broad weight range.



#9 JimC

JimC

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,706 posts
  • Location:South East England
  • Interests:Dinghies, especially box rule classes.

Posted 09 September 2013 - 12:32 AM

Interesting that this is something of the territory I explored with my PlusPlus one off. It worked out to a much bigger boat than Phil has in mind though.

I now suspect it may be an errror to aim for too much performance. Not only do you get into diminishing returns but also for both requied ability at sailing and market position you're on extremes of the bell curves.

#10 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,198 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 09 September 2013 - 12:35 AM

Much as I like self draining boats to sail, I'm in the 'middle' of my second major rebuild of a self draining boat in the last few years, and both have been necessitated by the area under the floor being just perfect for rot to develop, I can't think why they should be worse than front tank and side tank boats, but my statistically insignificant sample causes me to think... Maybe TANSTAAFL?

.

 

.......do you think the ply-rot problem would be reduced if the ply is epoxy,glassed??

 

The Hoot looks to be going in the right direction but the wings add complexity and cost to the build.

.

 

 .that's why I'm planning to go to fabric wings a la Moth,,,put some of the weight-savings into a more durable hull ;)



#11 IC Nutter

IC Nutter

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts

Posted 09 September 2013 - 12:42 AM

My vision would be for something that has the feel of an IC sailing upwind, if not the actual performance (which would not be possible with a shorter hull), but with the convenience and simplicity of a Laser. I doubt that both criteria can be achieved in full, but it would be nice to get close. Light and simple is the key I think.



#12 Phil S

Phil S

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,701 posts
  • Location:Sydney

Posted 09 September 2013 - 12:59 AM

Lon, The Finn is a good boat for BIG people. Most light fast boats are not.

Mal, The 3.7 has to be 35 years old. Its only 12ft and a bit wide and heavy. But its close to what I have in mind in concept otherwise. I have nothing drawn but would start with my IC design, cut off the back one metre or so and widen the bottom only a little. A Laser is 1.35m wide and about 1.0m on the WL, so 1m  wide or a bit less on the chines would give similar static stability. I think that is narrower than most boats in this category.

Jim, I agree that performance may be secondary to convenience and cost. But it will have to sail well and be rewarding, and it has to be quick compared to others, Trapeze for upwind performance, light and narrow for downwind performance.

Couch, Chris' Hoot hull looks about right, the pics of people carrying it under one arm are great, but when I saw the early videos with the wings hitting the waves I thought it was too low, that would be worse with a trap. Two wires and a harness will always be cheaper to build than wings. Even before foils a moth hull was about 1/3 of the build.

In Aust we have had Everdure for about 45 years, from Epicraft originally and now from International. Three coats inside makes ply boats last. Its a very thin epoxy wiith something extra in it I think. You still have to maintain the outside normally though.



#13 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,198 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 09 September 2013 - 01:09 AM

My vision would be for something that has the feel of an IC sailing upwind, if not the actual performance (which would not be possible with a shorter hull), but with the convenience and simplicity of a Laser. I doubt that both criteria can be achieved in full, but it would be nice to get close. Light and simple is the key I think.

.

 

...I'd have to say the HOOT is on that track-designed by an IC world champ,,Chris Maas.

,,,,with the thought of keeping 'simple' and 'fast' as close together as possible.

 

...I'd have to say the HOOT balances those qualities pretty well!

 

Couch, Chris' Hoot hull looks about right, the pics of people carrying it under one arm are great, but when I saw the early videos with the wings hitting the waves I thought it was too low, that would be worse with a trap. Two wires and a harness will always be cheaper to build than wings.

.

...Over the year I've been sailing the HOOT,,I've found zero problem with the wings smacking.

...............if anything,,,a heavier sailor approaching 200lbs gets too much splash over the bow between the wings,losing their heavy-weight advantage upwind in chop,,,but still no wing issues.

....the wings are just right for 'veal-heel',,if they were any lower,then there'd be an occasional slap to the windward wing.

 

...to remove wings and trap off the hull,or musto-bars would lose a huge amount of forgiveness that the wing bouyancy pods allow,,,and therefore eliminate median skill-levels a LOT!...cheaper,yes,,,but further out that bell-curve of accessibility!



#14 lonbordin

lonbordin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29 posts
  • Location:Bloomington, IN
  • Interests:Surfing, Sailing, Snowboarding. In real life I'm David Wilcox a CISSP (IT Security) working for a mid-sized company.

Posted 09 September 2013 - 01:16 AM

Lon, The Finn is a good boat for BIG people. Most light fast boats are not.

 

The Finn, designed in 1949 with a blistering Portsmouth of 90.1 and a boom height to match.

 

Big people are always thrown to the Finns (or as of late the MCs)... I'd like something with a little more performance, a higher boom and a hull weight that is less than 107 kg... if SF can be selfish... so can I.



#15 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,198 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 09 September 2013 - 01:22 AM

Lon, The Finn is a good boat for BIG people. Most light fast boats are not.

 

The Finn, designed in 1949 with a blistering Portsmouth of 90.1 and a boom height to match.

 

Big people are always thrown to the Finns (or as of late the MCs)... I'd like something with a little more performance, a higher boom and a hull weight that is less than 107 kg... if SF can be selfish... so can I.

 

....perhaps you should try singlehanding a 29er,,great fun S'handed,,,designed for your weight. ;)



#16 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,637 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 09 September 2013 - 01:31 AM

The main reason I'm interested in building it myself is to make sure it's done right, secondarily to not spend a fortune.

The main reason I'm interested in designing it myself is because everybody else seems to place much much higher priority on things I don't care as much about.

 

If I can't sail the boat at our club, or out of our back yard, it's not worth having. There is a small beach at the club but the water level varies highly; at my house I have a low bulkhead & dock. The boat must be capable of being handled around the dock, ie stable enough to climb in/out of and hoist/douse sail without too much gymnastics. Plus there are snakes here, I'm not all that interested in wading. For the same reason I don't want it squirrelly; fast yes but no blind-siding crash-burns.

 

The boat must have good performance but I want it to carry a good range of weight, a boat for me, for both my wife & myself, and for lonbordin if he chooses. I think this is the toughest characteristic to design into a small boat. But I think the dish sections show promise of generating good power and good lift without getting draggy. There are a couple of refinements I'm already looking at, making it narrower and shortening the cockpit so the floor can be made out of a single 8x4 panel; going to a rounded arc bottom instead of 3 panels, since I'm not going to build out of plywood. This will also make it lighter. It's important to have a singlehander that is light enough for one person to move it around IMHO, this is where all the available production boats fail IMHO.

 

The hull as shown has lots of initial stability, the lines at 13'6" LOA show the chin & transom just immersing at ~490lbs displacement. So making it narrower is going to mean less load-carrying ability and less stability.

 

Lonbordin I used to sail a Force 5 and those were OK boats but again I didn't like the non-self-bailing, didn't like the rudder, they tend to nose-dive and death-roll more than I'd like. It is pretty good ergonomically though, and it's fun. I want a boat that is lighter, just a bit more stable, easier to rig up, and self-bailing. BTW the boom height I showed is tentative, 34" above the side deck, which gives me easy ducking room... would catch me just above the eyebrows, but I don't want to raise it higher for obvious reasons. I have sailed a Finn and have no interest in that; they're too painful and too difficult to get them to "boot up" even though they're a blast once you get them in the groove.

 

Singlehanding a 29er is not a bad idea, I did that in a borrowed one for a couple tries. It's a bit complicated to rig up and I could not bring my wife ever.

 

I imagine with a trap the 'Selfish 13' could plane upwind but it would need a bit bigger sail than I was thinking of for myself (about 90 sq ft)

 

I would love to try a Hoot and hope to work it in next time we're out on the West Coast. At this point not sure exactly when that will be.

 

FB- Doug

 

Attached File  13ft 2-chine beach sailer DSK v1 DEMO07.jpg   99.69K   3 downloads



#17 lonbordin

lonbordin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29 posts
  • Location:Bloomington, IN
  • Interests:Surfing, Sailing, Snowboarding. In real life I'm David Wilcox a CISSP (IT Security) working for a mid-sized company.

Posted 09 September 2013 - 01:43 AM

SF just tellin' you my priorities are very similar to yours... I'll bet they're more like us.

 

Yeah the Force 5 only works when it's blowing for me and pure downwind is always a gamble (at least it rights easily).  I wished Brian Weeks was still with us working on the Force next generation. http://www.force5sai...m/nxtgen_f5.htm  

 

The in-laws are all around the NC area so I may come knocking.   :D



#18 Amati

Amati

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,645 posts
  • Location:Yes!
  • Interests:0 (t) = 0

Posted 09 September 2013 - 04:26 AM

how about a 5 metre square ish sailing canoe with a 5 metre ish assym and a small hiking plank set in place but not sliding athwart ships, so you'd sit out about 3' or so from the edge, kind of an outgrowth of what the Swedes have been doing with canoes (sort of)- hull like a longboard windsurfer or serenity, so no draining need take place? 15'~ ?  sail stayed on the ends of the seat with 2 spars, to get rid of twisting in the hull.  Maybe the seat could move fore and aft to get some rig rake.  maybe the mastfoot moves a foot or so longitudinally, 24" 30" beam...

 

hull = 35 lbs

seat 10lbs

spars and mast 20lbs?

 and the rest of the usual stuff 

 

75-80 lbs?

 

just a thought...



#19 BalticBandit

BalticBandit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 09 September 2013 - 05:35 AM

Doug - seems to me you are describing a modernized contender.  I agree with Phil that traps are the easiest way to RM (its just two bungees, some string and a hook in the mast at the hounds, do it right and you use the same bolt as the hounds).    But they do scare some folks off.  So perhaps a boat that can be built with racks or trap.     And if you take the Hobie Getaway kind of racks,  the non-gungho part of the family (often the wife but not always) can be taken out for a comfy ride).

 

BTW  I have a suggestion for the name:

 

The Pshaw 4.0.... as in "shucks,...pshaw... its not a shaw"

 

 

 

 

BTW, for me personally the complexity of an asso kite is offset by the benefits of AWA sailing.  In many ways my ideal would be a Hoot Hull with a trapeze instead of the wings.

 

One downside of FRP over foam is that it does go soft faster than other forms of boatbuilding.  Plywood hulls can rot, but a lot less if the interior is glassed (instead of just epoxy coated).  From this I would suggest thinking about construction along the lines of the Swift Solo (though ply instead of strip planked): 

  • namely build the hull over a male mold (as you would with foam but with fewer stations needed, thus simplifying the build). 
  • Glass the exterior, 
  • Build the dock dolly right on that exterior,
  • flip it & pull the male mold
  • glass the interior with either FG or carbon/carbon kev twill
  • Drop in bulkheads that have been double sided with Glass/carbon/Kev twill
  • build the deck out of flat sheets of ply sided with FG/carbonKev twill
  • use the bulkhead fillet mechanism Bram came up with for the mating bog between the deck and the stringers
  • Set a minimum weight with corrector weights based on foam hull, to be carried 60:40 at the stern and bow of the boat (assuming you care about this getting a PY rating)

 

This allows folks that want to, to build out of foam if they want to,  out of ply or out of strip ceder or even honeycomb  (me? I'd build the hull out of honeycomb, the bulkheads out of foam and the deck out off ply and make sure I came in 1/2 kg overweight)

 

None of the above really adds much complexity to the build (I've thought about building a Swift Solo that isn't class legal by going to honeycomb for the hull, ply for a dished rather than stepped deck

 

 

The one thing I would suggest, that does add some complexity to the build, but which allows for some experimentation, is to use a cassette system for the DB as well along the lines of the Swift.  This adds some apparent complexity, but actually makes the net build much easier.  What you do is build an oversized daggerboard trunk that is recessed by 1/4" on the bottom of the hull.  Then you fit two "caps" one on the bottom of the hull, one on top, that are connected by 4 rods in the corners.  And these become the load bearers for the DB.

 

This does four things.

1) it simplifies the build somewhat by reducing the alignment precision you need in the initial DB cutout and alignment in the hull and it simplifies aligning the deck opening

2) it simplifies the precision in making the cutouts to fit the blade shape you are going to use.

3) it allows different blade shapes to be used - which provides some "weight compensation" capabilities (lighter folks go for a shorter higher chord blade, heavier folks for a narrower chord but longer blade)

4) it allows other experimentation for tweaker geeks like gybing CBs

 

 

 

My 2 cents



#20 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,198 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 09 September 2013 - 05:44 AM

Doug - seems to me you are describing a modernized contender. ..................snip............ ................   But they do scare some folks off.

.

 

..yeh,I was thinking that,,,,but the weight you project would make it a lot more squirrelly,,,not so family friendly!



#21 JimC

JimC

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,706 posts
  • Location:South East England
  • Interests:Dinghies, especially box rule classes.

Posted 09 September 2013 - 07:13 AM

I'd go as long as I could - certainly over 14 ft. With the one off I picked 14 ad being a traditional length, also I wanted a light short feel. Andy P had always suggested it should be longer/thinner and was right. IC is too long for convenience on Euro garages as Phil says and weight complexity comes, but nearer the better. Certainly 15'6 I think.

#22 BalticBandit

BalticBandit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 09 September 2013 - 07:23 AM

Many US states have registration requirements that start at 15'



#23 facthunt

facthunt

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 894 posts

Posted 09 September 2013 - 07:57 AM

most people design the boat around their criteria then add engineering to make it work, suggest you put the engineering first.



#24 herr_zorzs

herr_zorzs

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 84 posts
  • Location:Austria, Lake Traunsee

Posted 09 September 2013 - 12:12 PM

so why not build a Quetzal?



#25 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,198 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 09 September 2013 - 01:14 PM

so why not build a Quetzal?

.

 

...good question--some people get a kick out of being tinkerer-sailors,,some are builder sailors,,,,

,,,,,,,,perhaps there's a renaissance trend showing itself of designer/builder/tinker-sailors :rolleyes:



#26 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,637 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 09 September 2013 - 02:36 PM

most people design the boat around their criteria then add engineering to make it work, suggest you put the engineering first.

 

What would you expect to gain by this? And what would you specifically put first?

All design work goes in cycles. Start at any point along the cycle, input wants vs needs, balance out compromises, round 'n round.

This boat has been thru 3 or 4 cycles now, considering some new info I now have plus comments I intend to run it around 3 or 5 more times. That is the wonderful thing about computers, they can do math really fast so you can change a little thing here or there and see how it affects stability or wetted surface, etc etc.

 

 

 

so why not build a Quetzal?

.

 

...good question--some people get a kick out of being tinkerer-sailors,,some are builder sailors,,,,

,,,,,,,,perhaps there's a renaissance trend showing itself of designer/builder/tinker-sailors :rolleyes:

 

Probably the best way to say what I am looking for.... NOT a hot house flower. I want a boat that can be sailed from a beach or dock, that you can climb In/out of, that doesn't need lots of specialized tender care or just exactly the right kind of facility... or just exactly the right kind of weather. The Quetzal is a very cool boat, and pretty close to what I want, but it does not look to have the initial stability nor the weight-carrying capability; and it doesn't have a rubrail so the first time you sailed it in any of the places I commonly sail, it would come back looking like it had been beat with a chain. (well maybe not the first time).

 

I have had one of those modern sexy looking boats with rounded topsides and we treated it like a Faberge egg. But over time it still got nicks & scars & ended up looking like hell. Now I say, give me a boat with a real gun'l !!

 

I very much appreciate all the comments and input. It looks like many people are looking more for speed as a priority, which is fine but not the top priority for this particular design. The cassette for daggerboard is a great idea; haven't settled on foils yet (I tend to like the 64A-XXXX series because they are simple and have a wide flattish lift-drag curve). But right now I am going to push a few other projects like this junior sailing program I have meeting this afternoon, and work this thing through a few cycles.

 

FB- Doug



#27 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,198 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 09 September 2013 - 02:59 PM

.......................All design work goes in cycles. Start at any point along the cycle, input wants vs needs, balance out compromises, round 'n round.

This boat has been thru 3 or 4 cycles now, considering some new info I now have plus comments I intend to run it around 3 or 5 more times. ..............

FB- Doug

.

 

.....I sense a design 'spiral' coming on!

 

 

 

...hopefully this one doesn't spin-out :rolleyes:



#28 BalticBandit

BalticBandit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 09 September 2013 - 03:56 PM

I still like the name I suggested:  pShaw...



#29 Steve Clark

Steve Clark

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,154 posts
  • Location:Where the water is thin.
  • Interests:Human folly.

Posted 09 September 2013 - 04:21 PM

My take on it, is that your are driven by a few things that really shouldn't be changes much.

You want a fair amount of upright stability in lightship trim, so the vessel can be parked at a float or otherwise left to itis own devices,

You need light weight, because you need to manhandle the craft around beaches and over bulkheads.

The construction must be fairly robust for the same reasons.

Further you wish to sail with one or two people aboard, which means that your hull has to sail well in a fairly wide range of displacements.

Finally, you don't want to spend a bomb to get these features. Your preference for ply construction is cheap, but at the light end not as durable as some other choices.

 

Weight of construction is almost entirely driven by the actual square footage of structure. A small surface will be more robust than a large surface for equal weight.  This is almost exactly contrary to your performance goals and your stability goals.

 

Some thoughts:

If you can spring for a carbon fiber mast, your upright stability goals get a whole lot easier to achieve.  The rig is the largest variable cost center in boats like this, but one that pays large dividends for weight reduction.  " Laser like" beam ( Bwl & Bmax) and midship freeboard are pretty safe and known to be about right.  If you want "laser-like" stability at the dock and sailing you shouldn't vary those by much.  Length on the other hand is always a plus until it gets out of hand ( like a single shell.)   Simply stated, the longer you make this boat for a given weight and beam, the faster it will be and the better it will sail two up. Handling ashore doesn't have to be a pain because sometimes it's easier to move things one end at a time. A long boat is easier to load on top of a car than a short boat for example.

 

On the double bottom front:

This is a classic spiral.  If you have a double bottom in a sit inside daysailer like boat, the boat ends up with quite a bit of freeboard.  The seats have to be 10" or so above the double bottom and the gunwales about 7" above the seats.  So in those boats the double bottom adds significantly to the surface area and the construction weight.  On a "sit on top boat" the double bottom eliminates the risk of swamping and filling by spray, so the freeboard can actually be reduced. Suction bailers are fragile, finicky and expensive, and worth avoiding if at all possible, so I prefer boats with double bottoms if I can get them.  However you do have the age old problem of sitting with your feet too close to your butt, as I have gotten older, I find that any ass perch lower than 7" a real pain in the knee if I have to have my feet close to under me.

Little boats often break from the deck down rather than from the bottom up. So the hull skin can probably be lighter than the deck skins.

 

Conclusion: Stretch you design. Don't impose arbitrary LOA limits and you should see the displacement length ratios drop and with it the wave making resistance.  If you maintain a "Laser-rlike" midship waterline beam and use a carbon fiber rig of about the same height, you should have better upright stability and good roll characteristics when sailing.  The rocker .waterlines and butts will probably straighten out. Because beam is fixed, depth can be reduced as length increases. All of which make the boaty easier to push trough the water. 

Long and light is not a surprising recommendation is it?

SHC



#30 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,637 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 09 September 2013 - 04:45 PM

I still like the name I suggested:  pShaw...

 

It's a good name but I have a lot of respect for the real Shaw

 

For right now it's dubbed the "Selfish 13" just because that was the stupid name I tagged on this thread... works, sorta

 

 

My take on it, is that your are driven by a few things that really shouldn't be changes much.

You want a fair amount of upright stability in lightship trim, so the vessel can be parked at a float or otherwise left to itis own devices,

You need light weight, because you need to manhandle the craft around beaches and over bulkheads.

The construction must be fairly robust for the same reasons.

Further you wish to sail with one or two people aboard, which means that your hull has to sail well in a fairly wide range of displacements.

Finally, you don't want to spend a bomb to get these features. Your preference for ply construction is cheap, but at the light end not as durable as some other choices.

 

 

I prefer boats with double bottoms if I can get them.  However you do have the age old problem of sitting with your feet too close to your butt, as I have gotten older, I find that any ass perch lower than 7" a real pain in the knee if I have to have my feet close to under me.

... ... ...

Conclusion: Stretch you design. Don't impose arbitrary LOA limits .... ...

Long and light is not a surprising recommendation is it?

SHC

 

Steve thanks for your comments. It looks like you know exactly what I'm looking for and perhaps was looking over my shoulder going around the design cycle. The butt-to-floor dimension as shown is about 10" partly because I like to lounge down inside on light air days (and want to keep said butt dry).

 

I looked at longer iterations but as you say, more overall area = more weight OR more fragile, but it also increases initial stability. This boat has a high prismatic as well as a high metacenter, so I can make it longer & narrower. Thinking to draw out the bow sections more to get the entry a bit finer.

 

Anyway not being a real boat designer, I have other work to do, but will get to work on this some more and hopefully have some more pretty pictures and maybe some firmer numbers in a few days.

 

FB- Doug



#31 JimC

JimC

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,706 posts
  • Location:South East England
  • Interests:Dinghies, especially box rule classes.

Posted 09 September 2013 - 07:22 PM

An interesting thing Andy P did with some of his later cherubs was to have topside flare that you sat on. Couldn't be done with plywood really, but worked well with foam. With a false floor he didn't need side tanks, and it saved two skins over an awful lot of surface area thus appreciable weight and money.. It required substantial "gunwhales" to provide a girder at the end of the topsides, but you're having one anyway...

Come to think of it my PlusPlus was also single skin above the false floor, although she also had styrofoam pads glued on top of the skin and shaped for comfort.

If you could cope with having something that was utterly unconventional in appearance you could do something like this... Little winglets that are comfortable side deck width, little bit of styrofoam padding on top, lightly glassed and so on...

Attached File  oddidea.gif   11.64K   57 downloads

#32 Luke Piewalker

Luke Piewalker

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 631 posts
  • Location:Scotia
  • Interests:Sailing and cycling and Guitarring

Posted 09 September 2013 - 09:20 PM

Phantom?



#33 lonbordin

lonbordin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29 posts
  • Location:Bloomington, IN
  • Interests:Surfing, Sailing, Snowboarding. In real life I'm David Wilcox a CISSP (IT Security) working for a mid-sized company.

Posted 10 September 2013 - 12:50 AM

Phantom?

I've always loved this video:

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=ZZepyjtFkCU

 

PS- I've never seen a UK Phantom in the US in my whole life of sailing...

I'm well traveled and I'm old.



#34 facthunt

facthunt

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 894 posts

Posted 10 September 2013 - 06:36 AM

most people design the boat around their criteria then add engineering to make it work, suggest you put the engineering first.

 

What would you expect to gain by this? And what would you specifically put first?

All design work goes in cycles. Start at any point along the cycle, input wants vs needs, balance out compromises, round 'n round.

This boat has been thru 3 or 4 cycles now, considering some new info I now have plus comments I intend to run it around 3 or 5 more times. That is the wonderful thing about computers, they can do math really fast so you can change a little thing here or there and see how it affects stability or wetted surface, etc etc.

 

 

 

>> 

so why not build a Quetzal?

.

 

...good question--some people get a kick out of being tinkerer-sailors,,some are builder sailors,,,,

,,,,,,,,perhaps there's a renaissance trend showing itself of designer/builder/tinker-sailors :rolleyes:

 

Probably the best way to say what I am looking for.... NOT a hot house flower. I want a boat that can be sailed from a beach or dock, that you can climb In/out of, that doesn't need lots of specialized tender care or just exactly the right kind of facility... or just exactly the right kind of weather. The Quetzal is a very cool boat, and pretty close to what I want, but it does not look to have the initial stability nor the weight-carrying capability; and it doesn't have a rubrail so the first time you sailed it in any of the places I commonly sail, it would come back looking like it had been beat with a chain. (well maybe not the first time).

 

I have had one of those modern sexy looking boats with rounded topsides and we treated it like a Faberge egg. But over time it still got nicks & scars & ended up looking like hell. Now I say, give me a boat with a real gun'l !!

 

I very much appreciate all the comments and input. It looks like many people are looking more for speed as a priority, which is fine but not the top priority for this particular design. The cassette for daggerboard is a great idea; haven't settled on foils yet (I tend to like the 64A-XXXX series because they are simple and have a wide flattish lift-drag curve). But right now I am going to push a few other projects like this junior sailing program I have meeting this afternoon, and work this thing through a few cycles.

 

FB- Doug

 

 

Ok, the stuff you are building this boat out of costs money,right, the more stuff you put into it the more it costs, the heavier it gets the slower it goes the longer it takes to build and so on.

so you need to step out of the box, and consider how you can achieve more with less, otherwise your concept will just be another variation of the familiar shit box.

you can do this by assessing each part that goes into the boat, design the boat, panel size and oriantation purely around load path and engineering best practice from a minimalist view point.

 you have to arrive at the best use of the materials at hand, I believe this can only be achieved by starting from an engineering premise then add your preconceptions to it.

 

I would start with the rig geometry and interface with the platform, then shape your panels to carry the load, in column and alignment.



#35 IC Nutter

IC Nutter

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 03:29 AM

I've done a quick interperitation of Phil's narrow lightweight trapeze singlehander. Maybe on quite what Phil had in mind, I've drawn the hull with a wide keel panel which helps to reduce panel curvature and helps with achieving a good volume distribution. I haven't modelled any internal structure yet, so far the panel weight (3mm plywood) comes to about 14 kg. I imagine that intenal structure will add another 3kg or so, then glue and sheathing may add another 5-10kg depending on choice of materials. So something in the order of 25kg for the bare hull may be achievable. My preference for the internal structure is to use closely spaced laser cut frames in 3mm plywood, to get a reasonable panel stiffness using 3mm plywood skins.

 

Attached File  TrapBoat.png   416.2K   19 downloads

 

Attached File  TrapBoat3D.pdf   513.9K   13 downloads



#36 JimC

JimC

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,706 posts
  • Location:South East England
  • Interests:Dinghies, especially box rule classes.

Posted 11 September 2013 - 07:41 AM

I think you'd want to get curvature into those panels. Not just for the water, but also for the stiffness effects.

#37 facthunt

facthunt

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 894 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 08:40 AM

I like the flat panels, iv been working on some 18s that don't hold up to rig load, the problem is in the curved form, the panels are straightening out (under the mast between frames) the curve in the foredeck allows the sides to move out, this may not be as significant

here, but still the same gremlins at play.

 

with the ply you could consider running the grain across the boat, stiffness across the shortest span.

 

nutter I have a sport boat design very similar, is it great minds think alike or fools seldom differ?



#38 FishAintBiting

FishAintBiting

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 417 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 08:44 AM

I think you'd want to get curvature into those panels. Not just for the water, but also for the stiffness effects.

 

Indeed.

 

Take the design of a NS 14, and tailor it to be sailed by only one person with a single sail.  Sweet!!



#39 IC Nutter

IC Nutter

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 09:36 AM

Below is a body plan for the narrow trap boat. I think there is a reasonable amount of curvature in the main hull panel. The keel and topside panels are drawn drawn as flat. I could spring a bit of shape into them but It may just increase the build difficulty for little real gain. The keel and topside panels are fairly narrow so they are well supported, particularly in the forward slamming areas. I'm anticipating using a frame spacing of less than 150mm, so panel stiffness should not be too much of a problem.

 

Attached File  TrapBoatHullSections.png   28.54K   12 downloads



#40 sosoomii

sosoomii

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 299 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 12:53 PM

I think you'd want to get curvature into those panels. Not just for the water, but also for the stiffness effects.

 

Indeed.

 

Take the design of a NS 14, and tailor it to be sailed by only one person with a single sail.  Sweet!!

+1



#41 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,637 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 11 September 2013 - 02:14 PM

Below is a body plan for the narrow trap boat. I think there is a reasonable amount of curvature in the main hull panel. The keel and topside panels are drawn drawn as flat. I could spring a bit of shape into them but It may just increase the build difficulty for little real gain. The keel and topside panels are fairly narrow so they are well supported, particularly in the forward slamming areas. I'm anticipating using a frame spacing of less than 150mm, so panel stiffness should not be too much of a problem.

 

attachicon.gifTrapBoatHullSections.png

 

Reminds of the old Suicide class... I'm trying to remember what little I absorbed from Bethwaite's talk about hull shape and the transition from disp to planing... it may be that your design would be so powered up that it would just as effectively never -not- be planing ? What would yout hink of making the 3 bottom panels out of one tortured panel instead, an arc or perhaps parabolic section?

 

Anyway I have done some more design work on my boat from the above pics...

 

Pulling the lenght out to 14'2" and narrowing it so that the cockpit floor can be made from a 4'wide panel... this hull has such a high prismatic that it still keeps a lot of initial stability (metacenter at about 1.3m on the stretched version vs 1.8 original). The total surface area of the hull, deck, and main bulkhead (excluding the cockpit floor) decreases by about 20%, a significant weight savings.

 

It does look a lot like a UK Phantom, and if there were Phantoms here I'd probably get one and shut up. I'm also toying with the idea of getting a Megabyte and shutting up, but that's both heavier & more expensive than I'd like, plus it's still not truly self-bailing.

 

Again, thank you all for the comments & input.

 

FB- Doug



#42 IC Nutter

IC Nutter

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 02:21 PM

I think you'd want to get curvature into those panels. Not just for the water, but also for the stiffness effects.

 

Indeed.

 

Take the design of a NS 14, and tailor it to be sailed by only one person with a single sail.  Sweet!!

 There was (still might be) a sub class of the NS14 which was a single hander. They just used the NS14 mainsail, no jib. It was a hiking class, no trapeze. There was a small enthusiastic following for a while, but it never really took off.



#43 IC Nutter

IC Nutter

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 02:30 PM

 

 

What would you  think of making the 3 bottom panels out of one tortured panel instead, an arc or perhaps parabolic section?

I presume that is what Phil was suggesting, but I like the extra seam as it provides more control over the hull volume distribution.

 



#44 sosoomii

sosoomii

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 299 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 02:58 PM

I really like the design brief for this boat.  I totally agree that ease of launching, rigging, capsize recovery and cost are more important (if less glamorous) to most folk than that extra 0.01kts.  You mention a metacentre of 1.3m for you latest iteration - is that above the keel or above the estimated centre of gravity? (and if so, including or excluding sailor?). 

 

Does anyone have any data on dinghy metacentres?  Do Finns calculate theirs from their roll test?  What is a good value as compromise between stability and feel? 



#45 JimC

JimC

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,706 posts
  • Location:South East England
  • Interests:Dinghies, especially box rule classes.

Posted 11 September 2013 - 03:07 PM

Also, for the hassle thing, don't ignore the small stuff... To attach the tack on my boat you thread a piece of string through a couple of blocks and put the loop on the end on a hook, and for the clew put a hook on a strap. In an ideal world there should be no buckles, no knots and no shackles. My canoe has two (captive pin) shackles to rig it, one because I don't have the facilities to make the ideal fitting I want, and one because of loading. Some of the mass production boats round here are really fiddly to rig - an RS200 tack requires you to tie a knot and put a strap with a buckle round the mast for instance.

However the Canoe also has about fifteen damn buckles and tie ups things on the cover. A quicker cover to get on and off would be a real blessing, especially when it starts raining at the end of the day.

#46 US 307

US 307

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 119 posts
  • Location:Louisiana
  • Interests:sailing, fishing, archery

Posted 11 September 2013 - 03:27 PM

It kind of sounded like you were trying to reinvent the Megabyte! 

 

I have a Megabyte, and it fits most of what you want.  The bailers don't drain all of the water out, but a big sponge or one of those water blaster things that you can get at the Dollar Store for a dollar, make quick work of the water, unless you are in serious waves.  I have a 2001 model, and the CF mast isn't coated to protect it form UV, so leaving it exposed isn't a great idea.  It's light and easy to set up, and total weight of the boat is around 130#.  Pretty stable if you don't put all your weight in the front of the cockpit.  Good deck height for old knees.  It is really well made, I'm the 3rd owner, and other than the sail, it is in great shape, and it has been sailed a lot.  They are a bit scarce, but you could probably find a used one quicker than you could build a boat.  I was suprised at the downwind speed of the boat, sitting forward and heeling  slightly to windward.

 

Check it out:   www.megabyteclass.org



#47 BalticBandit

BalticBandit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 04:25 PM

Too heavy. too slow



#48 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,637 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 11 September 2013 - 04:43 PM

Too heavy. too slow

 

Dunno about too slow, the Megabyte is a fun ride. And it has the initial stability I'm looking for. But it is too big & heavy. The Phantom is a bit on the heavy side too.

 

And what is that people don't get about self-bailing? Just the benefit of not having everything mildew from wet lines would be worth it, and that's probably one of the smallest plus factors.

 

FB- Doug



#49 Daniel Holman

Daniel Holman

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 234 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 07:46 PM

Phantom (at least originally) was a ply boat that could be built easily from sheet material, and has a decent amount or performance about it.

The Finn lamboley swing test is intended to measure longitudinal inertia, in order to prevent unhealthy building practices (light/exotic/fragile skins, heavily corrected) n a boat with a generous minimum weight. I would have to check some maths but you could possibly determine te longitudinal metacentre (way, way higher than trans meta centre) but not the transverse from such a test. In fact, thinking about it now the meta centre is a function of form rather than mass properties like inertia.

As such metacentre would be easy enough to find if you have an accurate lines plan or 3d model and you know the sinkages pertaining to the sailing displacement / trim combos.

Metacentric height (kmt) is one thing but gmt, (ie the distance between c of g and trans meta centre is the real determinant of initial transverse stability, so you'd need decent weight data as well as form data.
If gmt is below zero, the vessel will either adopt an angle of loll or capsize at rest.
Since many dinghy forms are broadly similar, comparing waterline beam is a convenient metric to determine initial transverse stability, which is a big factor in how easy or forgiving a boat is to sail in changeable (ie most) conditions.
Dan

#50 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,637 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 11 September 2013 - 09:04 PM

... ...

As such metacentre would be easy enough to find if you have an accurate lines plan or 3d model and you know the sinkages pertaining to the sailing displacement / trim combos.

Metacentric height (kmt) is one thing but gmt, (ie the distance between c of g and trans meta centre is the real determinant of initial transverse stability, so you'd need decent weight data as well as form data.
If gmt is below zero, the vessel will either adopt an angle of loll or capsize at rest.
Since many dinghy forms are broadly similar, comparing waterline beam is a convenient metric to determine initial transverse stability, which is a big factor in how easy or forgiving a boat is to sail in changeable (ie most) conditions.
 

 

I'm using DelftShip almost-free-ware, there is said to be a hull plan for the Laser available for it to compare but I don't have it. This program calculates the metacenter for any hull you're designing, you input the displacement and it shows the waterline at that displacement, the center of buoyancy, the center of mass of the hull plus whatever else is in the design (bulkheads, decks, trunks), wetted surface area, and the metacenter. Obviously all of these vary with displacement so you can see what it would look like assuming a given boat weight plus a 160lb sailor vs a 220 lb sailor.

 

For comparison, the metacenter of a 16' canoe is about .7m and the metacenter of an 11' RIB is about 2.8m. I'm assuming this is above the waterplane. The Laser a bit less tiddly than a canoe but not much.

 

Re- earlier discussion on weight & structure... After doing some work stretching & smushing the hull but not changing it's basic shape, looks like the optimum is somewhere between 14'2" and 14'7" after that, to keep total area down, the boat has to become too skinny and stability begins to suffer. That may still be too big, I just don't think it's possible to built a 14' hull with a self-bailing cockpit + deck strong enough to walk on that weighs 100~110 lbs. It's true that longer = faster but it's also true that heavy = PITA.

 

I will try to have some new drawings up by tomorrow evening.

 

FB- Doug



#51 Phil S

Phil S

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,701 posts
  • Location:Sydney

Posted 11 September 2013 - 09:57 PM

More like this?

Attached File  image012.jpg   46.66K   6 downloads 2006 IC build.

Just cut off the back 3 ft and maybe widen  the bottom a little.



#52 facthunt

facthunt

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 894 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 10:54 PM

 

I think you'd want to get curvature into those panels. Not just for the water, but also for the stiffness effects.

 

Indeed.

 

Take the design of a NS 14, and tailor it to be sailed by only one person with a single sail.  Sweet!!

+1

Nutters offering is in fact very close to the ns, without the chine measurement stretch.



#53 JimC

JimC

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,706 posts
  • Location:South East England
  • Interests:Dinghies, especially box rule classes.

Posted 11 September 2013 - 11:17 PM

That may still be too big, I just don't think it's possible to built a 14' hull with a self-bailing cockpit + deck strong enough to walk on that weighs 100~110 lbs. It's true that longer = faster but it's also true that heavy = PITA.

 

 

One of the mistakes I made designing my singlehander was getting too stuck on particular numbers in the design. I had particular numbers - cP was one I think - that I got particularily stuck on at that time, and that led me down the garden path a bit. I now tend to think that balance is everything, and in the eternal iterative game of compromises that makes up the process of getting a design out then there is a definite risk on getting certain things stuck in your head as critical. Compared to the boat I drew then I would now go longer, thinner and smaller sails.

 

If you are going for foam carbon you should certainly be able to get well below 100/110 - Andy P's Tin Teardrop, a very minimalist IC, came out at 40kg in her original iteration, and if you deduct at least 5kg for the plank...OK, Andy is a boat building genius, and *I* wouldn't have got near to that weight building that boat but even so... And of course you do get some stability back with length, or at least waterplane area, and the longer the boat the esier it is to design a nice shape.

 

 

I think the premade carbon glass planks have an awful lot to offer. Have you checked out the UK Cherub web site and the boat Clive (Moths, RS300,RS600) Everest has recently built for himself using exclusively waterjet cut carbon both sides panels for the interior and carbon one side panels for the shell, then adding the outer skin after its been assembled. One thing that looked really neat to me was that the boat was assembled from several precut planks below the chine, but careful sanding ended up with a continuous curve section on the outside with astonishingly little foam thickness removed.



#54 facthunt

facthunt

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 894 posts

Posted 11 September 2013 - 11:58 PM

... ...

As such metacentre would be easy enough to find if you have an accurate lines plan or 3d model and you know the sinkages pertaining to the sailing displacement / trim combos.

Metacentric height (kmt) is one thing but gmt, (ie the distance between c of g and trans meta centre is the real determinant of initial transverse stability, so you'd need decent weight data as well as form data.
If gmt is below zero, the vessel will either adopt an angle of loll or capsize at rest.
Since many dinghy forms are broadly similar, comparing waterline beam is a convenient metric to determine initial transverse stability, which is a big factor in how easy or forgiving a boat is to sail in changeable (ie most) conditions.
 

 

I'm using DelftShip almost-free-ware, there is said to be a hull plan for the Laser available for it to compare but I don't have it. This program calculates the metacenter for any hull you're designing, you input the displacement and it shows the waterline at that displacement, the center of buoyancy, the center of mass of the hull plus whatever else is in the design (bulkheads, decks, trunks), wetted surface area, and the metacenter. Obviously all of these vary with displacement so you can see what it would look like assuming a given boat weight plus a 160lb sailor vs a 220 lb sailor.

 

For comparison, the metacenter of a 16' canoe is about .7m and the metacenter of an 11' RIB is about 2.8m. I'm assuming this is above the waterplane. The Laser a bit less tiddly than a canoe but not much.

 

Re- earlier discussion on weight & structure... After doing some work stretching & smushing the hull but not changing it's basic shape, looks like the optimum is somewhere between 14'2" and 14'7" after that, to keep total area down, the boat has to become too skinny and stability begins to suffer. That may still be too big, I just don't think it's possible to built a 14' hull with a self-bailing cockpit + deck strong enough to walk on that weighs 100~110 lbs. It's true that longer = faster but it's also true that heavy = PITA.

 

I will try to have some new drawings up by tomorrow evening.

 

FB- Doug

Just looking at your displacement numbers there, is it worth factoring in the lift generated at sailing speed, also consideration as to direction and velocity the water mass is being displaced, water moving down = boat lifting(good) ,water moving aside=energy loss for no gain :( ,constant acceleration of water to transom :) rapid acceleration then return :o



#55 JimC

JimC

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,706 posts
  • Location:South East England
  • Interests:Dinghies, especially box rule classes.

Posted 12 September 2013 - 01:04 AM

Not worth considering dynamic lift if prime concern is weight carting boat round the beach!

#56 facthunt

facthunt

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 894 posts

Posted 12 September 2013 - 01:26 AM

Might need some sand tyres as well, do you have sand over there?



#57 JeffD

JeffD

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 45 posts
  • Location:New Zealand

Posted 12 September 2013 - 01:50 AM

I think you'd want to get curvature into those panels. Not just for the water, but also for the stiffness effects.

 

Indeed.

 

Take the design of a NS 14, and tailor it to be sailed by only one person with a single sail.  Sweet!!

 

Indeed it is so... infact dont worry about the design of a NS14. Just grab an NS14 and an angle grinder.

Attached Files



#58 Phil S

Phil S

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,701 posts
  • Location:Sydney

Posted 12 September 2013 - 05:40 AM

The problem with NS14s (and like size boats) as single handers is that its almost impossible to get started from a beach. The boat is too wide to insert the daggerboard without getting on board, and its way too unstable without the daggerboard inserted to be able to get on board. Catch22. (Two handed NS practice is to put the crew on board first and insert the board while the skipper holds the boat by the chainplates.) If you want a fast toestrap boat you need the width for power, and thats all the rage with all the new wanabee designs, Its just too hard to manage and so the Laser is still the most popular toe strap boat.

 

This problem can be solved by making the hull wider on the waterline and hence more stable, which makes it a much blunter boat which will not go as fast, making it longer as well helps but makes it big and cumbersome as well as heavier, and using an old fashioned pivoting centreboard, which makes it heavier again and more complex to build. The Contender has all three attributes and is still the most popular trapeze singlehander so if thats what you want it has to be the answer.

 

My idea is something as small as a laser with a trapeze for power for simplicity, and light enough to carry the hull under one arm. All perfectly possible but not enough people share my idea to make it worth building one.



#59 BalticBandit

BalticBandit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 12 September 2013 - 06:09 AM

Phil have you poked your head into the Hoot thread?  Cuz basically that's what it is.   And he's gotten his experimental prototype rigged with a kite now as well. 

 

Frankly I really like the Hoot approach though I would narrow the racks a touch, put a trap on it and add sail area by making the boom more decksweeping (the way the MPS does)



#60 JeffD

JeffD

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 45 posts
  • Location:New Zealand

Posted 12 September 2013 - 06:32 AM

Phil, While I agree with most of the points you raise, Id have to say getting the boat on and off the beach has never been a problem for me, maybe if I was shorter it would be an issue. Keep in mind the centre case is further back with a single sail so you dont have to reach around the shrouds as you would with the board in normal NS trim.

That said the NS is pig heavy and capsize recovery is harder than it should be due to the bouancy of the side tanks. But as a single hander it goes through the water nicely and is a well behaved platform for single handing on the wire.



#61 aus_stevo

aus_stevo

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,383 posts
  • Location:Sydney.

Posted 12 September 2013 - 07:46 AM

Phil, While I agree with most of the points you raise, Id have to say getting the boat on and off the beach has never been a problem for me, maybe if I was shorter it would be an issue. Keep in mind the centre case is further back with a single sail so you dont have to reach around the shrouds as you would with the board in normal NS trim.

That said the NS is pig heavy and capsize recovery is harder than it should be due to the bouancy of the side tanks. But as a single hander it goes through the water nicely and is a well behaved platform for single handing on the wire.

how big's ya rig?



#62 Phil S

Phil S

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,701 posts
  • Location:Sydney

Posted 12 September 2013 - 07:47 AM

The Hoot hull is very like what I have in mind (its close to Chris' version of a cut off IC rather than mine), but having built a lot of moths I know that the wings are always more work than the hull, use a lot of expensive materials and demand a lot of extra structure in the hull itself. I just think that if the object was to simplify and minimise manufacturing costs, then the trapeze is a much more logical way of gaining righting moment.

 

The Contender was designed in the 60s, the Farr 3.7 in the 70s and nothing else in this field has happenned since, except for the rash of totally impracical spinnaker singlehanders. Maybe the market is too small, but it does seem that a 21st century version might be about due.



#63 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,198 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 12 September 2013 - 08:23 AM

The Hoot hull is very like what I have in mind (its close to Chris' version of a cut off IC rather than mine), but having built a lot of moths I know that the wings are always more work than the hull, use a lot of expensive materials and demand a lot of extra structure in the hull itself. I just think that if the object was to simplify and minimise manufacturing costs, then the trapeze is a much more logical way of gaining righting moment.

 

.

.....yeh there's definitely some IC pedigree,with Mass' design,,but he actually developed it upwards from a open water rowing shell  ....I agree about the wings in one way,,but see some beauties in the way the design's come together,,though it makes sense to go to fabric wings for cost,weight,simplicity

.

Phil have you poked your head into the Hoot thread?  Cuz basically that's what it is.   And he's gotten his experimental prototype rigged with a kite now as well. 

 

Frankly I really like the Hoot approach though I would narrow the racks a touch, put a trap on it and add sail area by making the boom more decksweeping (the way the MPS does)

 

...the wings,their buoyancy, and hiking are all important ,if you're thinking about market accessibility at all,,,those changes would kill the alchemy

.....and 'deck-sweeper' boom...'really' :mellow:



#64 herr_zorzs

herr_zorzs

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 84 posts
  • Location:Austria, Lake Traunsee

Posted 12 September 2013 - 08:31 AM

 

I think you'd want to get curvature into those panels. Not just for the water, but also for the stiffness effects.

 

Indeed.

 

Take the design of a NS 14, and tailor it to be sailed by only one person with a single sail.  Sweet!!

 

Indeed it is so... infact dont worry about the design of a NS14. Just grab an NS14 and an angle grinder.

 

that does look pretty sexy



#65 JeffD

JeffD

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 45 posts
  • Location:New Zealand

Posted 12 September 2013 - 09:42 AM

 


Phil, While I agree with most of the points you raise, Id have to say getting the boat on and off the beach has never been a problem for me, maybe if I was shorter it would be an issue. Keep in mind the centre case is further back with a single sail so you dont have to reach around the shrouds as you would with the board in normal NS trim.

That said the NS is pig heavy and capsize recovery is harder than it should be due to the bouancy of the side tanks. But as a single hander it goes through the water nicely and is a well behaved platform for single handing on the wire.

how big's ya rig?

Just a baby really - 115sqft its actually a recut 3rd main from a 12. The original sail would be 15 years old now

 

What Phil says it true - spinnaker single handers are impractical. The blasting is fun, but in a mixed fleet there are tradeoffs, also no rest for the aged on the downhill... tragic

Attached Files

  • Attached File  NS.JPG   54.99K   35 downloads


#66 Blackjack2

Blackjack2

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 114 posts

Posted 12 September 2013 - 02:46 PM

My wife says I'm too picky. Well,, she's been the biggest beneficiary of that, if true. However I just don't understand why so many people settle for boats that are such a flaming PITA. I've sailed a bunch of different boats and they're all too heavy, too slow, too complicated, take to long to rig/launch, etc etc.

 

 

 


I happen to like self-bailing boats. Or self-draining boats, in other words a boat that the water will not collect in. Sloshing around your ankles, leaving the sheets and your lunch bag soaked in whatever you've been sailing in (generally not appetizing), dirt & mildew & a crust of salt always present. Plus you have to bail the friggin' thing while sailing. Sailing is fun. Bailing, while it is an elementary act of seamanship & builds character, is not fun.

 

There are lots of self-bailing boats, in fact I recently bought one to keep in the backyard and have really enjoyed sailing it (Capri Cyclone

 

More recently there has been a discussion about home built singlehanders, at which I brought up my gripe about not being self bailing. I posted a brief on how it would be almost as easy to build a self-bailer as not, but it wasn't really much of a design.

 

This is much closer to a finished design. 13'6"or 4.15m LOA, I think the hull could built to weigh around 110 lbs and be plenty durable, stable enough to not be too tricky around docks, fast enough to be fun (I think the hull shown would plane like a sum-va-beech). Needs a cool name though.

 


 

 

So! there it is

 

FB- Doug

Bull....me thinks you just want to design and build a boat and you do want the last .001% in performance! The lead in statements absolve you from meeting those goals. You could take a Zuma or Mega and modify it  (or even the Cyclone) to meet your stated requirements much easier than building from scratch and still getting some sailing in in the meantime.

And, for a cheap (in expensive) hull to carry the wifey in comfy where she can sit where ever she wants the 140/150 lb. weight ain't too bad.

Generally, building a first model from scratch will result in helping define the requirements for your next design that you really wanted in the first place.

Good luck

Jack

BTW, this is S/A :blink:



#67 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,198 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 12 September 2013 - 03:46 PM

What Phil says it true - spinnaker single handers are impractical. The blasting is fun, but in a mixed fleet there are tradeoffs, also no rest for the aged on the downhill... tragic

 

....that blasting IS fun,,and those adrenal rides are a lot why we sail,no?

...and you can always decide your limits,not fly the thing.

 

...with the hootchute**,I accounted for the very valid point people have made that the upwind/downwind times not get too different,,,ie 4-5x the time to go upwind as downwind--the answer?--a smaller chute!...something that wakes things up a bit when it's too light to get the apparent wind sailing going,,,but the boat doesn't take off from underneath you when it's 12-15...I asked the sailmaker(thanks kerry-northsails portland) for something 60-70% of 29er size

 

 .......I don't plan to make the chute's part of the standard kit yet...will see what the fleet wants once it stabilizes-don't want to scare the market -it's 'timid' enough as it is .,but have devised a red/yellow/green system I'd propose for racing....green=under ~5 knots,go for it!.....red=over ~15(?) knots,no chute use,apparent wind sailing beyond this point,,,,,,,and yellow=you can only raise your chute if the guy behind you does,,creating an equalizer,,and discretion on that old guy in the back!

 

 

.....**...not trying t'make everything into a hoot-thread,,,but am drawn to comment when it's mentioned ;) ;



#68 ortegakid

ortegakid

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,468 posts
  • Location:Whitesboro,TEXAS
  • Interests:High performance sailing, motorcycle road racing.

Posted 12 September 2013 - 10:02 PM

Great stuff Couch, ya make me want to sail one! Smaller kite on my AC makes all the diff, not death defying every time I raise it now! 



#69 JeffD

JeffD

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 45 posts
  • Location:New Zealand

Posted 12 September 2013 - 10:33 PM

Hell yeah - the downhill ride is what I remember for the rest of the week.

But it does take a alot of care using the kite in a mixed fleet. Half our club fleet is made up of kids and they are inevitibly spread over the whole course and only half are watching where they are going. Im still on the learning curve with it too, so things will get a bit smoother when I can pick the angles better.

 

I like the look of the Hoot and hope its a sucess. While i'd prefer traps, I think you will build a bigger fleet in the long run if you stick with the wings and hiking.

Your flag system is an interesting idea with kiting, but there might be a bit of colour blindness going on at the top mark I think :P . I do find that when its much less than 5kts you gotta heat it up alot to get things flying, OK on a triangle but DDW you get to the bottom mark quicker if you leave it in the bag



#70 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,637 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 12 September 2013 - 11:05 PM

Bull....me thinks you just want to design and build a boat and you do want the last .001% in performance! The lead in statements absolve you from meeting those goals. You could take a Zuma or Mega and modify it  (or even the Cyclone) to meet your stated requirements much easier than building from scratch and still getting some sailing in in the meantime.

And, for a cheap (in expensive) hull to carry the wifey in comfy where she can sit where ever she wants the 140/150 lb. weight ain't too bad.

Generally, building a first model from scratch will result in helping define the requirements for your next design that you really wanted in the first place.

Good luck

Jack

BTW, this is S/A :blink:

 

A new Megabyte is in the $10k range, if I were rich enough to buy one of those and take a saw to it for funsies, then I could build a floating dock & hoist ... couple ICs in the side yard, or maybe I could just become an RS dealer and order 2 or 3 of everything they make... get a couple of Phantoms shipped over too...

 

The Cyclone is a fun boat but at 130lb it's all I can do to drag it across the lawn & get it in/out of the water. It has the double flaw of being both heavy  fragile, the glass work is like old toothpaste mixed with drywall putty. But it sails pretty nice, tends to bog down in it's own waves a bit.

 

Looked at a Zuma, there's a Hansen turbo rig already available for it, but it's also not the best glass work and it has flat foils.

 

Do I want the glory of designing & building it myself? Design yes, build not so much but I can do a pretty good job (as long I don't have to make the mortgage doing it). Last 0.001kt speed? Sure, I want it fast as goose crap but not at the expense of it being fragile or too squirrely etc etc... if I'm only going to sail it once, and never ever sail it with my wife, then it needs to be SailRocket!

 

Meanwhile here's the new version. 14'3" LOA, the waterline shown is 400lbs

Hull & bulkhead surface area is 100.6 sq ft; deck & cockpit floor surface area is 61.9 sq ft, down about 10% from earlier version

Metacenter is 1.33m, height of the side tanks above the floor is  ~ 9"

 

Attached File  13ft 2-chine beach sailer DSK v4 dem01.jpg   123.33K   2 downloads

 

Attached File  13ft 2-chine beach sailer DSK v4 dem05.jpg   105.68K   2 downloads

 

Attached File  13ft 2-chine beach sailer DSK v4 dem20water.jpg   486.6K   1 downloads

 

Attached File  13ft 2-chine beach sailer DSK v4 dem22.jpg   295.28K   7 downloads

 

With the initial stability it's got, I think it could carry 100 sq ft of sail but it would either need a trap or to depower hard when it blows... looks comfy to hike though... spinnaker? Hmmm....

 

FB- Doug



#71 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,198 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 12 September 2013 - 11:43 PM

.......... Im still on the learning curve with it too, so things will get a bit smoother when I can pick the angles better.
 ..........snip........... I do find that when its much less than 5kts you gotta heat it up alot to get things flying,......... DDW you get to the bottom mark quicker if you leave it in the bag

...leave it in the bag for the light stuff??!

.....just 'get those angles and shifts right!

#72 JeffD

JeffD

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 45 posts
  • Location:New Zealand

Posted 13 September 2013 - 12:20 AM

Doug, its looking good. The lines and deck layout kind of resemble a larger version of a Farr3.7. Thats a compliment, as the Farr is a lovely boat to sail, though sucks if you weigh in above 80kg due to its 12' length.

 

If you are sailing single handed with the weights you were talking about and 100sqft, I think you would be able to trap once the wind gets to 10-12 knots if not less. At 15 you would need to wire to get any kind of control or else start reefing.

I think you need to make a call if its a trap boat or its not. If it is, then you want to be starting on the wire at about 8 knots and fully extended by 10. If you make the threashold higher the gusts are coming on harder and faster so you need to move much faster to keep the boat under control. Once you are trapping upwind you can pretty much handle whatever comes along by luffing or dumping the main. The problems are always when you are trying to climb out as a big gust hits.



#73 JeffD

JeffD

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 45 posts
  • Location:New Zealand

Posted 13 September 2013 - 12:39 AM

...leave it in the bag for the light stuff??!

I know, I know, it just doesnt seem right. But if you are racing and its a DDW and really light, the gybing angle required to get it flying efficiently requires a heap of extra distance to be sailed. Sure its more fun, but not first to the bottom mark. :unsure:



#74 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,198 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 13 September 2013 - 01:16 AM

...leave it in the bag for the light stuff??!

I know, I know, it just doesnt seem right. But if you are racing and its a DDW and really light, the gybing angle required to get it flying efficiently requires a heap of extra distance to be sailed. Sure its more fun, but not first to the bottom mark. :unsure:
...hmm,mehopes and think you're not right on that...it'd have to be VERY light!
.....I guess I'll possibly have a chance to test that out this weekend,,,we'll have 6 boats,,
...............and I'll be the only one 'carrying'!

#75 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,637 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 13 September 2013 - 02:19 AM

...leave it in the bag for the light stuff??!

I know, I know, it just doesnt seem right. But if you are racing and its a DDW and really light, the gybing angle required to get it flying efficiently requires a heap of extra distance to be sailed. Sure its more fun, but not first to the bottom mark. :unsure:

 

Wing-n-wing?

 

FB- Doug



#76 lonbordin

lonbordin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29 posts
  • Location:Bloomington, IN
  • Interests:Surfing, Sailing, Snowboarding. In real life I'm David Wilcox a CISSP (IT Security) working for a mid-sized company.

Posted 13 September 2013 - 02:40 AM

10 Square Meter* square top or go home!  ;-)

 

Selfish2  

(pat.pend.)  

 

*That's 107.639 sqft.



#77 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,198 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 13 September 2013 - 04:39 AM

 

...leave it in the bag for the light stuff??!

I know, I know, it just doesnt seem right. But if you are racing and its a DDW and really light, the gybing angle required to get it flying efficiently requires a heap of extra distance to be sailed. Sure its more fun, but not first to the bottom mark. :unsure:

 

Wing-n-wing?

 

FB- Doug

.

...wing-ding-a-ding?? .....we're talking drifter winds,,,hardly worth taking serious! :wacko:

...hmmm,yeh,I've been tempted to wing-ding at times,,usually not very efficient unless it could maybe be poled out,,but come to think of it,,the Hoot's set up pretty nice to try that,with the sheeting to the outboard-forward of the wing.

 

....I expect we'll likely see some of that condition this weekend,,maybe I'll give it a try-of course I'll need to DNS any race I pop the chute :mellow:



#78 facthunt

facthunt

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 894 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 06:03 AM

Are you getting much traction with the hoot?



#79 BalticBandit

BalticBandit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 06:24 AM

Hell yeah - the downhill ride is what I remember for the rest of the week.

But it does take a alot of care using the kite in a mixed fleet. Half our club fleet is made up of kids and they are inevitibly spread over the whole course and only half are watching where they are going. Im still on the learning curve with it too, so things will get a bit smoother when

I don't get this.  We raced 49ers in a very very mixed fleet back in 98/99/00.   We would have six 49ers, 30 or so lasers, 3-4 Etchells, 4-6 Stars, 4-6 I-14s,  all on the same very crowded course (because i light summer wind, you had about a 300m wide river of thermal breeze. 

 

Yes it meant you were having to sort your course out well in advance but so?

 

 

 

Phil, I dont understand why you are saying that the singlehanders with kites are "impractical"?  I could rig my Musto when it was sitting at the dock in about the same time as the Laser folks could rig their Lasers.   As for memories - the last race I was in on my Musto was the NooDs in Seattle the spring before last.  As Jeff points out, I don't remember much of any upwind leg (well ok I have  3 memories, one of which is me doing something stupid after a mark rounding and going swimming)  But I remember pretty much every downwind leg. 

 

And we didn't have all that much breeze.

 

And I still remember the downwind legs from 3 years ago in the Gorge. 

 

 

And this is on a boat where the upwind takes about  3x-4x as long as the downhill



#80 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,198 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 13 September 2013 - 06:33 AM

Are you getting much traction with the hoot?

.

...no,,they're actually quite slippery,,'cept the decks-there's good traction there :)

 

...we're racing 6 boats this weekend for the 4th event this year,,,3 boats are privately owned at this point.

 

...events have gone from a pain-to-recruit,,to 6 happy sailors...I'm looking forward to getting on with production this winter!

 

...you don't see me jumping up and down,,,'buy a boat!.buy a boat',,,,its just 'come out and try it'

.......these boats are great fun,,,they sell themselves--first hit free! :rolleyes:



#81 BalticBandit

BalticBandit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 07:24 AM

Plus you are doing the smart thing of building a cohesive fleet first

 

I think you should plan on selling them at first in minimum batches of 3 (tell the local club its 4 but let the deal go through at 3).    So then you just produce 3-4 hulls, cart them down to say Willamette YC or up to Jericho/Royal Van  and then down to Beserkley and Santa Cruze and Monterey

 

In Seattle, you should get someone to let you do a "Dog and Pony" for the Seattle Yacht Club teaching program as well as the Seattle Tennis Club (apparently they bought a bunch of RS Ventures I think it was)  And also the Meydenbauer Bay YC (eastside money).



#82 Phil S

Phil S

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,701 posts
  • Location:Sydney

Posted 13 September 2013 - 07:41 AM

I say that the spinnaker singlehanders are impractical because those which I have seen all:

Take for ever to rig,

Are complex to build,

Are  big and heavy for one person to handle in and out of the water,

Cost heaps more than a boat with only one sail,

Capsize much more often unless sailed by champion sailors,

Capsize too readilly when small things go wrong,

Take heaps longer to right after a swim

and in mixed fleets no one wants to sail close to them when the skipper has his head down hoisting, gybing or lowering  the kite, because no one, not even the skipper knows where the boat wil go next or which side it might capsize to.

 

There has to have been a dozen "Ground Breaking" new Assy Singlehanders in the past 15 years and I doubt there has been more than a few fleets formed around the world where people enjoy any form of class racing. People have bought them, but not that many continue to race them. WE barely see any in AUS. They might be good for a thrilling ride a few times but so is a Jet Ski, but people get bored and soon want more, or mess it up and decide its too hard..

 

Basically there are heaps of two person boats which do all that stuff heaps better.

 

The Laser has been a success partially because it is simple, convenient and relatively cheap to build. With the current legal turmoil in the Laser industry its maybe time for a 21st century update based on these same parameters.



#83 BalticBandit

BalticBandit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 10:40 AM

W

I say that the spinnaker singlehanders are impractical because those which I have seen all:

Take for ever to rig,

Are complex to build,

Are  big and heavy for one person to handle in and out of the water,

Cost heaps more than a boat with only one sail,

Capsize much more often unless sailed by champion sailors,

Capsize too readilly when small things go wrong,

Take heaps longer to right after a swim

and in mixed fleets no one wants to sail close to them when the skipper has his head down hoisting, gybing or lowering  the kite, because no one, not even the skipper knows where the boat wil go next or which side it might capsize to.

 

There has to have been a dozen "Ground Breaking" new Assy Singlehanders in the past 15 years and I doubt there has been more than a few fleets formed around the world where people enjoy any form of class racing. People have bought them, but not that many continue to race them. WE barely see any in AUS. They might be good for a thrilling ride a few times but so is a Jet Ski, but people get bored and soon want more, or mess it up and decide its too hard..

 

Basically there are heaps of two person boats which do all that stuff heaps better.

 

The Laser has been a success partially because it is simple, convenient and relatively cheap to build. With the current legal turmoil in the Laser industry its maybe time for a 21st century update based on these same parameters.

Well thanks for the response but
 

  1. Too Long to rig - you missed the part where I could go from an unstepped mast to ready to sail on my MPS in the same amount of time it took a Laser to get launched:
    1. Join the two piece mast - same
    2. attach the lowers (extra time)
    3. Place the mast butt on the mast step - same
    4. lift mast up while taking up slack on forestay  - faster
    5. Bend on forestay - extra time
    6. pin Boom to gooseneck - same as attaching vang
    7. rerun vang control - faster than running jib cunningham
    8. Splash boat - Same
    9. hoist sail - roughly same, but I can do it dockside rather than having to launch with the sail up
    10. attach Cunno - about the same as getting the boom and boom cascade on a laser
    11. stick in the rudder - faster (no stupid pintles to deal with and then tying on the rudder downhaul
    12. stick in the blade - faster (no bungee to tie on)
  2. Complex to build?  An MPS is simpler to build than a contender.  Its one piece hull, one piece deck, 2 bulkheads,  and then bolt on some deck fittings.
  3. MPS has 1/2 the hull weight of the Contender and is 10% lighter than an International Canoe
  4. As to cost - well that depends.  A used RS 700 is around 5kL  a decent IC is about the same.   Yes there is added cost with a kite - extra sail, prod, Sheets, 4 turning blocks.  But that's minor compared to the new hull cost.  A new MPS skiff FOB Ovington costs 700L more than an RS 300 and 1100L more than a RS 600.   That's just about the cost of the kite and prod
  5. Captsize?  well yeah.  but the same is true of a Moth.  or any HPS boat
  6. Nah
  7. Heaps longer to right?  Only if you crashed with the kite up.  bareheaded its faster to right than an RS 300

 

now as to 8 - sharing the course.  Well it may be that some other boat skippers don't want to share the course with say an MPS or RS700 - but that doesn't have to do with the heads down of the skipper.

 

instead it has to do with the guys in the Laser or Taser still hiking their brains out going upwind - even though the MPS started behind them sailed a longer windward leg... and NOW is blasting through their fleet at Mach 2 with a HUGE SEG (Shit Eating Grin) on their face - while the lead Tasar or NS 14 skipper has to explain to his grimacing girlfriend crew why THEY are having more fun than the MPS driver.

 

The reason you barely see any in Australia I suspect is because Its more fun to spend the time sailing than the 35 bazillion hours to fly to OZ and show you how much fun it is.  :-)

 

 

Now as to double handed boats  The problem is that you need to always scare up crew.  The main reason I sold my 49er and did not buy an I-14 but instead bought an MPS was because of the year I spent scaring up crew only to find out they weren't as good as they said they were and finding myself pulling the foot off the gas to keep us upright.  And watching 1/2 dozen I-14 and 5oh skippers go through the same hassle.



#84 IC Nutter

IC Nutter

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 10:59 AM

BB,

 

You seem to have missed the whole rigging the spinnaker bit.



#85 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,198 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 13 September 2013 - 01:37 PM

..

 

I say that the spinnaker singlehanders are impractical because those which I have seen all:

Take for ever to rig,

Are complex to build,

Are  big and heavy for one person to handle in and out of the water,

Cost heaps more than a boat with only one sail,

Capsize much more often unless sailed by champion sailors,

Capsize too readilly when small things go wrong,

Take heaps longer to right after a swim

and in mixed fleets no one wants to sail close to them when the skipper has his head down hoisting, gybing or lowering  the kite, because no one, not even the skipper knows where the boat wil go next or which side it might capsize to.

 

There has to have been a dozen "Ground Breaking" new Assy Singlehanders in the past 15 years and I doubt there has been more than a few fleets formed around the world where people enjoy any form of class racing. People have bought them, but not that many continue to race them. WE barely see any in AUS. They might be good for a thrilling ride a few times but so is a Jet Ski, but people get bored and soon want more, or mess it up and decide its too hard..

 

Basically there are heaps of two person boats which do all that stuff heaps better.

 

The Laser has been a success partially because it is simple, convenient and relatively cheap to build. With the current legal turmoil in the Laser industry its maybe time for a 21st century update based on these same parameters.

phil,,,all the complexities of spinnaker singlehanders  you list are true!

...when one thinks of a moth,,and the fact it doesn't use a chute,one -mazes- at it's pure simplicity!----'really' :mellow:

 

....if it was for pure simplicity,,we should all get kites and shut-up about all these crazy hullshapes ,,foil tuning,,whatever.

...personally I DO see kiting as the pure essence of our sport,and anything else is fraught with compromise and 'design spirals'! ,,,but realize at the same time that a compromise I prefer to make is to have an actual hull under me---something to do with the ability to deal with changing conditions,,but part of dealing with those changing conditions is the ability to toss up more sail at will,,to master the complexities of doing it singlehanded....(don't play well with others! :mellow: )

 

....it seems your list above is a bit skewed-written from the bias of a moth sailor--not the simplest,,economical boat going by any means!,,,and the skill level involved--isn't each and every competent moth sailor a 'champion' sailor in their own right ,,,yet they still ''Capsize too readily when small things go wrong,''

 

...I really don't get what you're on about....something about the pot calling the kettle too complex,,or expensive



#86 BalticBandit

BalticBandit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 01:53 PM

Nope, Kite stays bent on.  That's the nice part about a nice mesh launcher bag.  You don't unbend the corners on the MPS.  even when dropping for transport:

  • Undo the boom and unreave the vang
  • you just slack the forestay enough to pop the lowers
  • unstep the mast butt forward
  • split the mast and rotate it tip forward so that the kite halyard does not have to be unbent
  • tie this all up with the mainsheet (still bent on) and spin sheet
  • Throw the cover on.

 

No need to unbend the kite



#87 ortegakid

ortegakid

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,468 posts
  • Location:Whitesboro,TEXAS
  • Interests:High performance sailing, motorcycle road racing.

Posted 13 September 2013 - 04:21 PM

Kite on! Rigging the AC is a simple as that also, really about a 10 minute affair when kite already on boat. And 'cause of the pump system, very easy to get up and down. Halyard size and material the most important part of the equation, as is getting the length and bungee all adjusted, but once perfected, amazingly simple to fly, and what a feeling of accomplishment! Seven feet from the boat and flyin!



#88 facthunt

facthunt

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 894 posts

Posted 13 September 2013 - 07:58 PM

racing yachts are trending towards flying sails on furlers, could this be an option for the small single hander



#89 ortegakid

ortegakid

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,468 posts
  • Location:Whitesboro,TEXAS
  • Interests:High performance sailing, motorcycle road racing.

Posted 13 September 2013 - 09:43 PM

Weta has it, seems to work for my TCC friends!



#90 BalticBandit

BalticBandit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 14 September 2013 - 01:31 PM

Kite on! Rigging the AC is a simple as that also, really about a 10 minute affair when kite already on boat. And 'cause of the pump system, very easy to get up and down. Halyard size and material the most important part of the equation, as is getting the length and bungee all adjusted, but once perfected, amazingly simple to fly, and what a feeling of accomplishment! Seven feet from the boat and flyin!

My experience is that pump systems make it much harder to raise and douse.... but then my first Asso dinghy kite was a 49er



#91 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,198 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 14 September 2013 - 02:46 PM

 

My experience is that pump systems make it much harder to raise and douse.... but then my first Asso dinghy kite was a 49er

...holy thread-hijack batman!...don't know why this stuff isn't in the S'handed chute thread :unsure:

 

....yer used a pump on your 49r chute?!.....  an early daze experiment I guess! ..thanks for saving the world from it! :)

......I've got one of those kicking around,seems to make sense for S'handing--might try it on the (HOOT!) if the 1:3 doesn't work.

 

 

..........actually,I'm really glad I wasn't around 49ers in the first couple of cycles...I can thank your lot that I could walk in to a set of rig tension #'s,,,rev9's to put them on,,,,,,,,  no vanguards,,,and economical used boats!



#92 IC Nutter

IC Nutter

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts

Posted 14 September 2013 - 03:31 PM

Still playing with the narrow lightweight single handed trapeze boat. Here's a proper tortured ply version:

 

Attached File  Nutter42-Bottom.jpg   27.05K   17 downloads

 

Attached File  Nutter42-Side.jpg   22.41K   24 downloads

 

Attached File  Nutter42-Top.jpg   32.98K   20 downloads



#93 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,637 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 14 September 2013 - 10:34 PM

Still playing with the narrow lightweight single handed trapeze boat. Here's a proper tortured ply version:

 

attachicon.gifNutter42-Bottom.jpg

 

attachicon.gifNutter42-Side.jpg

 

attachicon.gifNutter42-Top.jpg

 

What's the length and disp?

 

Looks fast, there's cetainly nothing to hold it back

 

FB- Doug



#94 IC Nutter

IC Nutter

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 02:39 AM

Still playing with the narrow lightweight single handed trapeze boat. Here's a proper tortured ply version:

 

attachicon.gifNutter42-Bottom.jpg

 

attachicon.gifNutter42-Side.jpg

 

attachicon.gifNutter42-Top.jpg

 

What's the length and disp?

 

Looks fast, there's cetainly nothing to hold it back

 

FB- Doug

 

Length overall is 4.2m, beam overall is 1.0m, displacement is 130kg. Assuming the all up weight can be kept below 40kg, the helmsman weight could range up to 100kg, but optimum range might be 70 - 90 kg. Although it is a trapeze boat, the narrow beam means that the righting moment is not huge. Sail area might be 8 or 9 sqm.



#95 duncan (the other one)

duncan (the other one)

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,700 posts
  • Location:Siderney

Posted 15 September 2013 - 03:09 AM

4.2m ply under 40kg ?  Is this realistic?



#96 facthunt

facthunt

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 894 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 03:33 AM

Its only a metre wide



#97 FishAintBiting

FishAintBiting

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 417 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 06:03 AM

Length overall is 4.2m, beam overall is 1.0m, displacement is 130kg. Assuming the all up weight can be kept below 40kg, the helmsman weight could range up to 100kg, but optimum range might be 70 - 90 kg. Although it is a trapeze boat, the narrow beam means that the righting moment is not huge. Sail area might be 8 or 9 sqm.

 

Hmmm, like your thinking here.  Certainly has similar righting moment to a Moth, any thought of using their rigs?

 

Can't make it out too clearly, but appears to not have a false floor yet there are side tanks.  Why have you chosen this direction?

 

May you sail in fair breezes.

 

Fish



#98 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,198 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 15 September 2013 - 06:08 AM

Length overall is 4.2m, beam overall is 1.0m, displacement is 130kg. Assuming the all up weight can be kept below 40kg, the helmsman weight could range up to 100kg, but optimum range might be 70 - 90 kg. Although it is a trapeze boat, the narrow beam means that the righting moment is not huge. Sail area might be 8 or 9 sqm.

 

...might be a bit of a trade-off in the design 'spiral' to the ''stable enough to not be too tricky around docks'' part of the initial criteria,,n.t.t.a.w.w.t.!!

..that weight and I assume a thinner beam at WL would make it quite an exciting boat!

 

...judging by the HOOT with it's 31'' wlBeam,,,and the sail area's pretty close to 10m,,and  the fact that the HOOT's wings put a sailor's weight pretty much the same place as trapezing off the gunnel,,,methinks you'd probably be fine with similar size sail.

 

... an area I would be concerned about,,if your trapezing off the gunnel(?) ,is the waterflow on the feet...

...on the HOOT  the wings are nicely clear of smacking waves,,but there's a lot of waterspray that's deflected off the undersides that would otherwise be 'in-your-face'.......just a thought t'chew on ;)

....perhaps the gunnel flare in your pics would deal with this

 

....I also really like other factors the wings add.....the buoyancy at wing end is one thing on the water,,,,but landing on a shore is really nice!...lift bow,,float the stern in until it hits sand,,,'plonk' the boat down,,it heals ~35degrees to the wing,,then waits nicely like a well behaved puppy!...........yes solid wings are a heavy p.i.t.a. for building,,,but fabric wings a'la moth is the answer here.

 

 

 

....I'd think it a good idea that some of these builds fit towards a box-rule,,4.3m,,,10m,,with a maximum mast height,,sprit length?...

...just in case any of us find ourselves in the same area. :rolleyes:

,



#99 duncan (the other one)

duncan (the other one)

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,700 posts
  • Location:Siderney

Posted 15 September 2013 - 10:35 AM

Its only a metre wide

 

yeh.. but (4.2 x 2.5(say) x .004)m^3 * 600kg.m^-3 = 15kg just in 4mm ply.

 

Add glass, frames, mast/shroud structure, glue, fittings, mast, boom, CB, rudder etc 

 

doable ?



#100 IC Nutter

IC Nutter

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 12:26 PM

Length overall is 4.2m, beam overall is 1.0m, displacement is 130kg. Assuming the all up weight can be kept below 40kg, the helmsman weight could range up to 100kg, but optimum range might be 70 - 90 kg. Although it is a trapeze boat, the narrow beam means that the righting moment is not huge. Sail area might be 8 or 9 sqm.

 

Hmmm, like your thinking here.  Certainly has similar righting moment to a Moth, any thought of using their rigs?

 

Can't make it out too clearly, but appears to not have a false floor yet there are side tanks.  Why have you chosen this direction?

 

May you sail in fair breezes.

 

Fish

 

According to the Phil S's brief, which I am supposedly working to, the rig should be similar to a Moth rig, but with a bolt rope for convenience. I suppose you could just use a Moth rig but simplicity, quick rigging and easy launching are some of the aims of the aims of the design, so the bolt rope makes sense.

 

The IC has a big righting moment to sail area ratio and is fully powered up to about 15 knots true wind. I like this feature of the IC. Although it is always tempting to use a bigger sail, and 10 sqm would be quite feasible for this boat, I prefer to stick with a modest sail area and go for efficiency (low wetted area and light weight) to get the required performance. It helps with cost reduction and provides a boat which will be a blast to sail in stronger winds.

 

Regarding the cockpit, although a lot of people seem to see it as a bad feature, I quite like the Laser footwell. I find the Laser to be reasonably comfortable in light winds compared to boats with a shallow, wide dish type cockpit. What I have tried to do here is to get a deep but narrow footwell with widish side decks. The central spine which blends into the rudder support should help as a footrest when getting out onto the trap and also provides a bit of extra depth for the daggerboard case.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users