Jump to content

Groucho Marx

Members
  • Content Count

    908
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Groucho Marx

  1. The long triangular shape on floor is the area aft of the main beam. Cockpit shell is nearest camera. The angled forward main beam lies on its side to the right. The thing above beam is the forward hull skeleton. Have been using thin ply that has been lying around in shed.  Because up until the last few days it has been impossible to buy materials in Auckland because of the dreaded Covid 19.

     

  2. Almost finished the after and larger section of the above water central pod. When I finish the forward central hull part, will be able to assemble the tri/catamaran. Which will be named Frog 2. The main beam is finished. Have shortened it by a metre and a half because original tri platform was excessively wide for a cat. Am thinking of 5 metre length fine floats with braces fore and aft at the beam/float connection. To stiffen the area. Because there is only one beam. Will post images tomorrow.

  3. Decided the mast triangulation support was too deep, would be too close to water surface  - so sawed off the lot and started again. Did I say was following my nose?

  4. Changes: floats are now 7 metres, central cockpit somewhat shorter than the outer hulls but with rudder aligned with float transoms. Or maybe I should hang the rudder or rudders off the hulls - like any conventional catamaran. But I like the idea of a single rudder off the central cockpit.

    Have repaired and attached the main beam to make one unit.

    69FU7358.JPG

  5. But I wanted the gains from wide spaced foils, meaning that the main beam could be built less wide than say, Hydroptere's way oversquare (and heavy) overall beam. So on Frog the efficiency loss was compensated by the lighter weight (and less aerial drag) main beam.

    On earlier designs I've played with inverted T foils also in sloping "conventional" J and L designs. To my "suck and see" amateur approach/mind I can't see or feel the theoretical differences between in facing/out facing foils. They all work.

    And the very high aspect ratio inverted T foils on the beyond fast AC75s, half of their lifting areas, are working against each other? No?

     

  6. Extremely crude sketches of Frog 2 ideas. The middle one is of the central above water hull with rudder ideas. The floats will be 4 metres long. The windward float foil will be lifted/lowered from central cockpit.

  7. Yes, but I'm thinking still of small floats (although longer and with more buoyancy than what Frog 1 had) and relying on the foils to provide power, lift and balance. I have a number to chose from stored in my shed, ha.

    • Like 1
  8. Right, Laurent. Absolutely. Water ballast on the cradle. Forced to decide that a while ago when cleaning up the wreckage.

    This morning have come up with some other crazy ideas. Why not a slender main hull (with much carbon reinforcement) that doesn't touch water, to take the rig and beam loads - with a slender transom to carry the T rudder? Bit like Hydroptere - with a smaller/less depth main hull - but more like a Lake Garda 35 - which is a catamaran.  Minimalist minus?

    Hydroptere.jpg

    • Like 2
  9. In this closed down period in Auckland have done an oil painting and readied another larger one but have also stuck together Frog's broken main beam. Which has triggered a few mad thoughts. And maybe I can build Frog version 2 - with an even more minimalist main hull (lower wooded) and slightly longer floats. Something like this plan drawing of 3 Devils but slightly smaller. And make a smaller chord single luff mast. And fit a larger main using the two double luff older mains stuck together to make a 35 foot setup. Just crazy talk. I'll come to my senses tomorrow?

    2056247606_Newmodel3Devils_Linesplan.bmp

  10. Yes, makes sense. Frog was exceptionally light and water ballast would probably have saved it.

    Same thing applied to the earlier design Sid - which had a 500mm chord wing mast - which certainly didn't help in hard wind conditions. Frog had the much smaller chord D mast with two luff tracks but the boat still took off and arsed over. The airfoil main beam design would also have attributed to the unintentional flying.

    What I should have done, with brilliant 2020 hindsight, is to have, what you suggested, made a heavy cradle with water ballast tanks.

    Maybe I can repair Frog's broken beam, build a lower wooded main hull, have all the intact foils, and then  ....? No. Beyond insane?

    Also Jacques wants me to change the Crowther 24 he is eyeing. Am trying to swerve away.

    Here's a very early sketch of Sid, called Demon Tricyle 2.  The more things change the more they stay the same?

    Demont2.jpg

    • Like 1
  11. Frog got inverted in high on shore winds (I think it actually flew like a tethered kite) and smashed upside down, all pieces taken to the tip. Although the main beam is also broken in two, it can be easily repaired. But what to do? Suggestions that I paint a mural on it and then Jacques could hang it in his high walled factory for visitors to comment upon.

    frogandskimmer.jpg

  12. Groucho ready for mast lift but unfortunately I have to wait for an ugly bilge keeler that has got stuck under my pohutukawa gantry; tides will increase end of next week.

    757U0018.JPG

×
×
  • Create New...