Jump to content

Cruising boats that plane


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, MFH125 said:

There's a gaff rig version of L'ENFANT PERDU which Panoramix posted a photo of earlier, as well.  I love the combination of these gaff rigs with modern lightweight hulls.  Undoubtedly impractical, but it just seems like it would be a lot of fun to sail.

I do wish L'ENFANT PERDU owners were a little more adventurous with their choice of paint.  Every time I see one of these boats I think that all white doesn't really flatter them all that well.

 

rendu184.thumb.jpg.bef9fd6492b4f0d8f0467d99e0548774.jpg1218430403_EPleHavre.jpg.3938a91c9f749dfbce9c7d23318eabd1.jpg1305287327_epsepembre2016-2.thumb.jpg.aa7582b1721e0bf05df4b0f65468cc1c.jpg

Balta is surely a very creative architect. Here is Etoile Horizon once more.

I think she was even built along IMOCA standards?

aurique1.jpg

Yes, I too think this concept works very well on certain angles:

d_3fe08c9461.jpeg

'Idee' by Georg Nissen

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 408
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

So this thread has established that different people have different definitions of cruising. We've also determine that shouting at people on the internet won't change their minds. We're maki

I always thought of my last boat as a cruiser - I knew I'd regret selling her.  

If they'd headed up a bit and got someone to trim/pump the main she might have climbed up on her bow wave and left the quarter wave behind.  Looked more like forced hull speed to me.

Posted Images

38 minutes ago, Panoramix said:

@MFH125 l'enfant perdu is basically a smaller version of Etoile Horizon that is on the video. If only I had a workshop, time and money on my hands... hopefully the thing that would eventually come out of the workshop would probably look like "l'enfant perdu". I think most of them have a marconi rig. The one in your photo was built by a guy working in a hotel in Paris, not particularly skilled who put all his free hours toward the build of the boat in Brittany. Respect...

I also really like the design.  Fast, but with a touch of whimsy.  Not sure her 3m deep T-keel is very suited to the waters I sail in, but I love the large-hull, small accommodations approach.

Anyone who builds a 40 footer in their spare time has my respect, it's a huge project!

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

I think she was even built along IMOCA standards?

Yes as in she can measure as an IMOCA but obviously she can't keep up.

2 hours ago, MFH125 said:

Not sure her 3m deep T-keel is very suited to the waters I sail in, but I love the large-hull, small accommodations approach.

It is a lifting keel (dinghy style with the trunk that goes all the way up) 3m wouldn't work here either. I think that some of them might be able to dry out on the bulb and 2 legs, or at least that was an option proposed by the architect. The boat only works thanks to the deep draft that allows lot of righting moment without carrying too much ballast. The AVS is very high.

2 hours ago, MFH125 said:

Anyone who builds a 40 footer in their spare time has my respect, it's a huge project!

Definitely, I was part of a team of 10 who built a 30 footer, it took us a bit more than a year, a 40 footer alone after work hours is just amazing, I don't know how some people can do it!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Panoramix said:

 

Definitely, I was part of a team of 10 who built a 30 footer, it took us a bit more than a year, a 40 footer alone after work hours is just amazing, I don't know how some people can do it!

No other hobbies and no life except work for money and work for your only hobby.

In my head I have great ideas. But when I start to plan them out, I put them back in the fridge. I can't and won't commit a couple of years to one project. I have already enough ongoing projects for lots of years.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Panoramix said:

It is a lifting keel (dinghy style with the trunk that goes all the way up) 3m wouldn't work here either. I think that some of them might be able to dry out on the bulb and 2 legs, or at least that was an option proposed by the architect. The boat only works thanks to the deep draft that allows lot of righting moment without carrying too much ballast. The AVS is very high.

Do you know anything about the retraction mechanism for the keel?  Hydraulics? Lifting from the mast? With 3m of draft it either doesn't rise very much or it sticks up through the deckhouse in a way that interferes with the boom when raised.

The 3m draft is limiting for sure.  Limiting where I sail, but doable.  For my own personal use I'd be more concerned about the forward projecting bulb.  I get why it's designed that way.  It's hydrodynamically clean and it makes the lifting arrangements simple and compact.  But lobster pots and T-keels are not a great combination.  There are some boats around here which are designed with fin keels meant to shed lobsterpots.  That usually means a leading edge sweep of 25-30 degrees, though.

But such is the price of speed, I guess!

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, MFH125 said:

The 3m draft is limiting for sure.  Limiting where I sail, but doable.  For my own personal use I'd be more concerned about the forward projecting bulb.  I get why it's designed that way.  It's hydrodynamically clean and it makes the lifting arrangements simple and compact.  But lobster pots and T-keels are not a great combination.  There are some boats around here which are designed with fin keels meant to shed lobsterpots.  That usually means a leading edge sweep of 25-30 degrees, though.

It is an hydraulic ram, you can see it on this photo forward of the keel that is lifted (not sure if it is fully up or not) :

588d3597c04bbdbff577a122cb10fd47.jpg

The keel definitely interferes with at least the kicker, it surely doesn't go 3m up but even say 1.5m draft is a big difference. I suspect that all the way up would be unsafe.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Bryanjb said:

I did find some race results for a local SC 70, of the 30 or so races they've done down here in the island it looks like there average is around 700 sec/mile or about 5.1 knots.

You do know about the cosine law as it applies to course speed and tacking angles upwind, right? I can see how a cruiser might be oblivious. How 5.1 might be 7.2?

You have seriously deluded yourself about the SC70 (and any other ULDB) speed on any given course. Such boats go upwind just fine. In comfort and style, too. They can really shine when it goes light and others are motoring. Fishing opportunities from a ULDB in fun mode are rare.

I've nothing against your choices. Simply not for me. Been there, done that. Not fun for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Coming back to the original question, I believe the JPK 38 is capable of planing while being a rather comfortable boat.

JPK38_6225-623x415.jpg

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, estarzinger said:

This I could really get behind . .  .although I would be very tempted to eliminate the arch

That is over done. The arch, huge dodger and swim step crap push it too far into the cruiser catamaran camp. Maybe too much topside rise. Might only look like it planes. Ugh...ughly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, El Borracho said:

 Ugh...ughly.

. . .  quite functional (all three of the features you mention lol) :)

I honestly dont care if it 'planes', but it clearly will sail well.

I am not a big fan of plastic windows . . much prefer tempered glass . . . but that might add too much weight for this concept (not sure).

As to whether a cat is a better choice . . . that's another question.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can the 'driver' see anything past that hard dodger? Boom is going to be very high. I assume there will be a mast...is there a useful sized sprit? The cockpit lines are all crammed on the pedestals...hope that actually works...might be cool...but where is the traveller...on the arch?

Who builds her?

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

That is over done. The arch, huge dodger and swim step crap push it too far into the cruiser catamaran camp. Maybe too much topside rise. Might only look like it planes. Ugh...ughly.

That's a JPK 45: http://www.jpk.fr/?titre=jpk-45-&mode=voilier_jpk&id=924

JPK don't make slow boats.  And as to the looks, it's like a light plastic Boreal.  I think it looks great ... apart from the graphics on the side.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I do enjoy the diehards denouncing light modern boats.   Fugly, miserable motion, not actually fast ... so they say.

The script has barely changed in the 50 years since Bob Perry triggered the wrath of the crusties who raged against his Valiant 40.

Yet light modern boats are circumnavigating as if it was a routine habit ... while the Golden Globe race of heavy, long-keeled boats was decimated by catastrophic damage.

If Beth & Evans's lovely Hawk had been launched in 1970, the crusties would have been denouncing her as far too extreme for coastal racing, never mind offshore: wildly tall rig will break, wildly deep keel will fall off, no skeg so rudder will break, and almost no deadrise: it's a mad big dinghy!   Yet now Hawk looks restrained, even for a cruiser.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Matagi said:

Coming back to the original question, I believe the JPK 38 is capable of planing while being a rather comfortable boat.

JPK38_6225-623x415.jpg

 

Totally agreed. I love the interior plan as well as all that natural light from the 3 topside windows as well as the big forward and side windows in the cabintop, which make it bright below, and therefore family and cruising friendly.

Reviewing the video, as I've watched it before, I again wondered why they've felt in necessary to speed up some parts of the video where they're planing. The boat is fast enough as it is, there's no need to exaggerate.

I've never sailed with an aft traveler, is there a reason it isn't common on boats outside of JPK, Pogos, Sun Fasts and the like?

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

I wonder what the cut out in the bow is for?

IMG_0002.JPG

 

ygpN-R0ENs6l82NqKrOfDhcRY3Poj63RBd1CykHL

Good question. Just speculating here:

military-war-ship-cannon-deck.jpg

 

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

I've never sailed with an aft traveler, is there a reason it isn't common on boats outside of JPK, Pogos, Sun Fasts and the like?

Salesmen fed up of having to explain why an aft traveler works much better to potential customers complaining that it is in the way ?

From a practical point of view, the only actual downside I can think of is that in a Chinese gybe the mainsheet sweeps across the cockpit potentially entangling itself in whatever sticks out (winches, heads, wheel pedestal etc...) Using a preventer is thus more important from a safety point of view.

When it is completely aft like for the JPK, it probably is less of an issue than when it crosses the cockpit.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, El Borracho said:

That is over done. The arch, huge dodger and swim step crap push it too far into the cruiser catamaran camp. Maybe too much topside rise. Might only look like it planes. Ugh...ughly.

You know, when it is mid-season, temperature is 10ºC, sailing upwind and your are alone keeping watch @ 4am, the big hard dodger is really appreciated...

Arches are convenient and relatively clean aerodynamically, I am sure they would let you buy one without.... then 5 years down the line somebody might well add an ugly contraption made out of stainless steel tubes to support various crap that doesn't have a home  (solar panel, various antenna, wind generator etc...)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Panoramix said:

Salesmen fed up of having to explain why an aft traveler works much better to potential customers complaining that it is in the way ?

From a practical point of view, the only actual downside I can think of is that in a Chinese gybe the mainsheet sweeps across the cockpit potentially entangling itself in whatever sticks out (winches, heads, wheel pedestal etc...) Using a preventer is thus more important from a safety point of view.

When it is completely aft like for the JPK, it probably is less of an issue than when it crosses the cockpit.

Basic lever principle would have been my answer. But this one is good, too.

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

 the big hard dodger is really appreciated...

dodger was one of Hawk's best features . . 

Arches 

Hawk was designed for an arch, but we did not put it on when we built her. I have never seen a good analysis about what impact one actually has on upwind performance.  It can't be good, but the question is how bad is it, which idk. We did end up with a radar pole with a lot of stuff on it - also dont know how that compares to an arch in terms of performance hit.  The arch does give you more solar room and potential for over night dinghy lifting (I dont think I could stomach sailing with a dinghy there even if I had one).

This boat has 2' more waterline and is (about) 10,000lbs lighter than hawk. JPK admit it is not 'for the ice'.  Would be interesting to know something objective about helm balance, but you never seem to be able to get a straightforward apples to apples answer on that.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TwoLegged said:

I do enjoy the diehards denouncing light modern boats.   Fugly, miserable motion, not actually fast ... so they say.

The script has barely changed in the 50 years since Bob Perry triggered the wrath of the crusties who raged against his Valiant 40.

Yet light modern boats are circumnavigating as if it was a routine habit ... while the Golden Globe race of heavy, long-keeled boats was decimated by catastrophic damage.

If Beth & Evans's lovely Hawk had been launched in 1970, the crusties would have been denouncing her as far too extreme for coastal racing, never mind offshore: wildly tall rig will break, wildly deep keel will fall off, no skeg so rudder will break, and almost no deadrise: it's a mad big dinghy!   Yet now Hawk looks restrained, even for a cruiser.

I think you misinterpreted my remarks. I'm all for the new boats like the JPKs. I was only commenting on what I could see in the pics. The JPK 38 pic looks great to me. The pic of the 45 is depressing in that they are obviously going after the heavy cruiser crowd. Cannot fault them for chasing the cash...selling their soul :-) I'll wait for the first pic of one with a dinghy aft, sat and phone domes on the arch, full canvas house, high boom, staysail furler, and every condo appliance down below...then we can all cry.

I'd order a Pogo 50 if I was a bit younger.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, El Borracho said:

The pic of the 45 is depressing in that they are obviously going after the heavy cruiser crowd.

I think that they are going after the high mileage crowd who see the advantages of a fast light boat but aren't ready to freeze themselves. That dodger certainly slows down the boat but some people will rather have an 175NM comfortable day than a 180NM wet day! What makes sense in western Europe might not make sense in California though.

Dodgers were uncool 20 years ago but now that even the IMOCA pros shelter themselves behind one, it is much more acceptable in peoples' minds!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Panoramix said:

I think that they are going after the high mileage crowd who see the advantages of a fast light boat but aren't ready to freeze themselves. That dodger certainly slows down the boat but some people will rather have an 175NM comfortable day than a 180NM wet day! What makes sense in western Europe might not make sense in California though.

Given the shape of the JPK 45'3 dodger, I doubt that it slows the boat much.  And it will certainly slow the boat a lot less than a soft dodger, whose shape deforms under wind pressure into a much less aerodynamic profile.

Shelter for the crew is just one of the innovative virtues which the French-dominated offshore classes have brought to sailing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, TwoLegged said:

Given the shape of the JPK 45'3 dodger, I doubt that it slows the boat much.  And it will certainly slow the boat a lot less than a soft dodger, whose shape deforms under wind pressure into a much less aerodynamic profile.

Shelter for the crew is just one of the innovative virtues which the French-dominated offshore classes have brought to sailing.

Yes, I said - 5 NM but that was just a random number, a few percents looked about right, it might well be less and as you say the soft dodger that eventually gets installed is worse!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Panoramix said:

I think that they are going after the high mileage crowd who see the advantages of a fast light boat but aren't ready to freeze themselves. That dodger certainly slows down the boat but some people will rather have an 175NM comfortable day than a 180NM wet day! What makes sense in western Europe might not make sense in California though.

Dodgers were uncool 20 years ago but now that even the IMOCA pros shelter themselves behind one, it is much more acceptable in peoples' minds!

Take a step back, look again. That JPK 45 is a long long way from an IMOCA or a POGO or the other real-deal JPK yachts. It is a grab for the Beneteau market. For the booze cruise customer that wants the hard chine and wide transom look while not feeling anything. Not that there is anything wrong with that. Just my harsh opinionated review.

 

f9cadd38ecc6ce61a714f12b979d5865.jpeg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mainsheet is on the dodger. I think it's a great boat, more like a fast expedition boat, in no way related to the JPK race boats. I'd rather see a potential X-4.6 client as their prey here.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/10/2021 at 11:07 AM, Borracho said:

You do know about the cosine law as it applies to course speed and tacking angles upwind, right? I can see how a cruiser might be oblivious. 

I've actually raced for 50 years, everything from planning dinghy's to IOR lead mines to modern planning one designs.  I've seen what the SC 70's can do in many Mac races

Where we kept the boat for winter storage is where a half dozen SC 70's stayed.  These boats are not your run of the mill production boats, they all have custom deep keels, towering carbon rigs and very expensive sail wardrobes.

After the recent heavy air upwind Chicago Mac, won by a SC 70.  They all had keel damage and one that I know of had a broken main bulkhead. 

The SC 70 I referenced earlier looked to have a stock rig and was having a tough time passing a Hanse 40.  

My point is, it's possible to buy older inexpensive waterline that will be quick, comfortable and have the ability to carry payload.  Buying a planning hull gives you only one of those three benefits.

 

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

Take a step back, look again. That JPK 45 is a long long way from an IMOCA or a POGO or the other real-deal JPK yachts. It is a grab for the Beneteau market. For the booze cruise customer that wants the hard chine and wide transom look while not feeling anything. Not that there is anything wrong with that. Just my harsh opinionated review.

Pity that your "harsh opinionated review" doesn't take into account the facts, like fully-infused construction of hull and internal structure, and a SA/D of 25.5.  That's a million mile from a Beneteau Oceanis.

See https://www.yachtingworld.com/reviews/boat-tests/jpk-45-performance-cruiser and http://www.jpk.fr/?titre=jpk-45-&mode=voilier_jpk&id=924

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

My point is, it's possible to buy older inexpensive waterline that will be quick, comfortable and have the ability to carry payload.  Buying a planning hull gives you only one of those three benefits.

The heavier the boat to start with, the less payload it can carry... If you have to carry weight, you want beam not dead-weight!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Matagi said:

Mainsheet is on the dodger. I think it's a great boat, more like a fast expedition boat, in no way related to the JPK race boats. I'd rather see a potential X-4.6 client as their prey here.

I don;t think that the silos are anywhere near that rigid. The JPK 45 uses a similar hull shape to the JPK race boats, and has the same weight-obsessed build: all infused, even the furnishings.

It's more like a race JPK with a cruising cockpit+dodger that an X-4.6

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

The heavier the boat to start with, the less payload it can carry... If you have to carry weight, you want beam not dead-weight!

A heavier boat carries more payload because it's a smaller percentage of the overall weight. As an example, our boat weighs 65,000 #'s, carrying 10,000 #'s is a small percentage of the overall weight of the boat.  Take the same size boat that weighs half as much and add that weight and it will affect the boat dramatically.  Sure, you can say you'll only carry 5,000 #'s but will you?  

We owned and raced a Shock 35 for 20 years, it weighs 1500#'s less then JPK 38.  Adding weight (crew) was great to go upwind but slow downwind.  What do you think happens to a planning hull when you add weight?  Hint, they get sticky.

Go race a planning one design, you'll find out quickly you want the biggest, but lightest, most athletic crew possible to win. Leverage upwind, light weight downwind.

Cruising boats want to carry payload and if the payload is a smaller percentage of the overall weight of the boat it's going to be faster. The boat is sailing more closely to it's designed weight.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Bryanjb said:

A heavier boat carries more payload because it's a smaller percentage of the overall weight. As an example, our boat weighs 65,000 #'s, carrying 10,000 #'s is a small percentage of the overall weight of the boat.  Take the same size boat that weighs half as much and add that weight and it will affect the boat dramatically.  Sure, you can say you'll only carry 5,000 #'s but will you?  

We owned and raced a Shock 35 for 20 years, it weighs 1500#'s less then JPK 38.  Adding weight (crew) was great to go upwind but slow downwind.  What do you think happens to a planning hull when you add weight?  Hint, they get sticky.

Go race a planning one design, you'll find out quickly you want the biggest, but lightest, most athletic crew possible to win. Leverage upwind, light weight downwind.

Cruising boats want to carry payload and if the payload is a smaller percentage of the overall weight of the boat it's going to be faster. The boat is sailing more closely to it's designed weight.

Review the thread title: Cruising boats that plane. What are you on about? Sea cargo? Racing? Beating to weather?

1 hour ago, TwoLegged said:

Pity that your "harsh opinionated review" doesn't take into account the facts, like fully-infused construction of hull and internal structure, and a SA/D of 25.5.  That's a million mile from a Beneteau Oceanis.

See https://www.yachtingworld.com/reviews/boat-tests/jpk-45-performance-cruiser and http://www.jpk.fr/?titre=jpk-45-&mode=voilier_jpk&id=924

 In my defense I didn't compare it to a Beneteau, only the market target. I'm arguing between the real performance boats and the fast is fun lifestyle from Pogo and JPK vs. this instant JPK 45 thing that looks to be destined to hauling heavy cruising fittings and freight. However I'm sure it fits the thread: cruising boats that plane and will be attractive to the crowd that needs sat domes and dinghy davits and the idea of planing more than actual planing.

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

A heavier boat carries more payload because it's a smaller percentage of the overall weight. As an example, our boat weighs 65,000 #'s, carrying 10,000 #'s is a small percentage of the overall weight of the boat.  Take the same size boat that weighs half as much and add that weight and it will affect the boat dramatically.  Sure, you can say you'll only carry 5,000 #'s but will you?  

We owned and raced a Shock 35 for 20 years, it weighs 1500#'s less then JPK 38.  Adding weight (crew) was great to go upwind but slow downwind.  What do you think happens to a planning hull when you add weight?  Hint, they get sticky.

Go race a planning one design, you'll find out quickly you want the biggest, but lightest, most athletic crew possible to win. Leverage upwind, light weight downwind.

Cruising boats want to carry payload and if the payload is a smaller percentage of the overall weight of the boat it's going to be faster. The boat is sailing more closely to it's designed weight.

It is just simple physics, the bigger the waterplane area the less the hull will sink when you add x kilos, so you want a wide boat with full ends... extra depth = extra weight / (density x waterplane area) it isn't rocket science, just Archimedes's law. It has nothing to do with percentage of initial weight, that is silly, following your logic it would make sense to bolt dead weight to the boat to be able to carry more weight!! Sure, the heavy boat will already be handicapped by its weight so will have "less speed to lose" but the fact that the boat is heavy to begin with let you carry less weight not more! A boat like a Pogo will carry a lot, ask @shaggybaxter, that is because it is wide, I can believe that the schock 35 doesn't like weight as the ends are quite pinched.

Obviously yes, if you are racing you want the boat to be as light as possible but that will also be true for a heavy boat. People who race seriously Dragons for instance don't carry anything unnecessary onboard....

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Borracho said:

In my defense I didn't compare it to a Beneteau, only the market target. I'm arguing between the real performance boats and the fast is fun lifestyle from Pogo and JPK vs. this instant JPK 45 thing that looks to be destined to hauling heavy cruising fittings and freight. However I'm sure it fits the thread: cruising boats that plane and will be attractive to the crowd that needs sat domes and dinghy davits and the idea of planing more than actual planing.

I'm not so sure about the target market overlap.

"Hey honey, for only twice the price of that BenBavJean 45 we loved at the boat show, we can get a JPK!"

"Why?"

"Well, it' built really light and really strong"

"But does it have that lovely wood+leather cabin of the BenBavJean, and the three heads and the TV and the microwave?"

"No, but ... "

"Your dinner is in the dog"

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, TwoLegged said:

I'm not so sure about the target market overlap.

"Hey honey, for only twice the price of that BenBavJean 45 we loved at the boat show, we can get a JPK!"

"Why?"

"Well, it' built really light and really strong"

"But does it have that lovely wood+leather cabin of the BenBavJean, and the three heads and the TV and the microwave?"

"No, but ... "

"Your dinner is in the dog"

You have nailed it: “Cruising cuckold boats that plane.”

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

When it comes to boats that are more in a size range I can afford, I quite like the look of Paul Bieker's Riptide 25.  She has ~700 lbs of moveable water ballast to help keep her upright with a small crew.  There are no photos on the website and the drawing say 2013, so it seems like she may still be sailing only on paper.

I'm sure her accommodations are spartan, but what else do you expect from a 25 footer?  I've cruised on a Stone Horse for a week, and never minded it.  You basically have to think of it as luxurious camping: comfortable berth, good place to sit, a 2 burner stove and a large icebox, decent head, etc.

Riptide-25-Web-Arrangement.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MFH125 said:

You basically have to think of it as luxurious camping: comfortable berth, good place to sit, a 2 burner stove and a large icebox, decent head, etc.

+1 and quite luxurious compared to what some do!

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Panoramix said:

+1 and quite luxurious compared to what some do!

 

I've done some beach cruising.  Even that is luxurious compared to what some of my friends who like through-hiking do.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MFH125 said:

When it comes to boats that are more in a size range I can afford, I quite like the look of Paul Bieker's Riptide 25.  She has ~700 lbs of moveable water ballast to help keep her upright with a small crew.  There are no photos on the website and the drawing say 2013, so it seems like she may still be sailing only on paper.

I'm sure her accommodations are spartan, but what else do you expect from a 25 footer?  I've cruised on a Stone Horse for a week, and never minded it.  You basically have to think of it as luxurious camping: comfortable berth, good place to sit, a 2 burner stove and a large icebox, decent head, etc.

Riptide-25-Web-Arrangement.jpg

That design was done for a good buddy of mine and is being built right down the road. Actually two are being built at the same time, between paying jobs. The paying jobs are usually custom foils for boats like this, usually Bieker designs.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/9/2021 at 10:45 AM, Panoramix said:

The whole point of hydogenerators and watermakers is to avoid carrying vast quantities of fuel and water! 

but the amount of plastic particles in water making watermakers as unreliable as it gets, almost without a chance of cleaning out the filters....i believe tha in like 10-15 years there will have major extinction of fish on our hands and the funny thing is WE CANT DO SHIT ABOUT IT LMAO

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Russell Brown said:

between paying jobs

Ahhh... the 2013 date on the drawings makes perfect sense, then.  Very cool design, I look forward to seeing them on the water some day!

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

It is just simple physics, the bigger the waterplane area the less the hull will sink when you add x kilos, so you want a wide boat with full ends... extra depth = extra weight / (density x waterplane area) it isn't rocket science, just Archimedes's law. It has nothing to do with percentage of initial weight, that is silly, following your logic it would make sense to bolt dead weight to the boat to be able to carry more weight!! Sure, the heavy boat will already be handicapped by its weight so will have "less speed to lose" but the fact that the boat is heavy to begin with let you carry less weight not more! A boat like a Pogo will carry a lot, ask @shaggybaxter, that is because it is wide, I can believe that the schock 35 doesn't like weight as the ends are quite pinched.

Obviously yes, if you are racing you want the boat to be as light as possible but that will also be true for a heavy boat. People who race seriously Dragons for instance don't carry anything unnecessary onboard....

In your physics, you are missing an important fact: the SA/D ratio. Speed is a function of power to weight, and a given increase in weight will have more effect on a light boat, without doubt. Many light planing hulls are very beamy, so yeah, they will carry a lot of weight without the rails going under. 

I own a Porsche and a one ton Ford truck. Guess which is faster? Now guess which is faster with 2000 Kg loaded in the trunk for a trip?

Link to post
Share on other sites

guys . . . . . different sailors have different (quite different) objectives and esthetics . . . . lets accept that, in fact lets celebrate it, there is little point is trying to convince the other guy they are somehow 'wrong'.

I personally happen to like the JPK45 - it's sort of an update on Hawk which was an absolutely fabulous boat for us.  I would make a few adjustments to it - but I find the general concept attractive, while neither a pogo nor Bryanjb's 65,000lb 'old long & heavy' concepts really work for me.  If some of you think that makes me an idiot or having poor taste . . . well I can live with that - I have enough experience to have some confidence in my choices, but also enough experience and self-confidence to applaud all your different choices.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, DDW said:

In your physics, you are missing an important fact: the SA/D ratio. Speed is a function of power to weight, and a given increase in weight will have more effect on a light boat, without doubt.

Except the expression SA/D supports @Panoramix. The D term is only displacement, not some weighted combination of lightship and loading.

However I get what your are contending. If lightship D is already huge, and the boat don’t plane, cargo makes little difference.

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

guys . . . . . different sailors have different (quite different) objectives and esthetics . . . . lets accept that, in fact lets celebrate it, there is little point is trying to convince the other guy they are somehow 'wrong'.

I personally happen to like the JPK45 - it's sort of an update on Hawk which was an absolutely fabulous boat for us.  I would make a few adjustments to it - but I find the general concept attractive, while neither a pogo nor Bryanjb's 65,000lb 'old long & heavy' concepts really work for me.  If some of you think that makes me an idiot or having poor taste . . . well I can live with that - I have enough experience to have some confidence in my choices, but also enough experience and self-confidence to applaud all your different choices.

 

What? There is no One True Way?? /s 

That said, I bet the mattresses in the aft cabin of the JPK45 fits perfectly into the chine. :P

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

In your physics, you are missing an important fact: the SA/D ratio. Speed is a function of power to weight, and a given increase in weight will have more effect on a light boat, without doubt. Many light planing hulls are very beamy, so yeah, they will carry a lot of weight without the rails going under. 

I own a Porsche and a one ton Ford truck. Guess which is faster? Now guess which is faster with 2000 Kg loaded in the trunk for a trip?

it really depends where you start. Generally light boats will have a better SA/D than heavy ones by the times the 2 are loaded to have the same, they will probably be carrying lot of stuff. Will the heavy boat or the light boat be faster at this point ? The answer is it depends. You can't speak in generalities like this as  there are boats of all kind of shapes, the righting moment also matters a lot especially when the wind exceeds 15 knots. Even if it is true that weight gives you power, not all heavy boat will be very powerful as some have a rather high CoG whereas some light boat will be as they have torpedo bulb very low.

For light boats, typically l'enfant perdu (boat in the photo above) will suffer from being overloaded (narrow boat) whereas the Pogo 12.5 not so much as it is a very wide and powerful boat!

For heavy boats on one hand if you carry lot of stuff on a Boreal, it won't matter too much (wide and powerful boat) but on the other hand Pierre André Huglo removed the engine of his Contessa 32 before doing his "Longue Route" as the boat is narrow and he decided that to carry enough food safely the engine had to go!!!

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

Pierre André Huglo removed the engine of his Contessa 32 before doing his "Longue Route" as the boat is narrow and he decided that to carry enough food safely the engine had to go!!!

There is something just wrong about a Frenchman sailing a Contessa 32.  Fine boats, but very English, and very not French.

It's like a Greenlander serving curry, or a Siberian Mariachi band, or a Ghanaian sushi bar, or Japanese man in a kilt, or my friend who went salsa dancing in Mullingar: globalisation gone too far.

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, TwoLegged said:

There is something just wrong about a Frenchman sailing a Contessa 32.  Fine boats, but very English, and very not French.

It's like a Greenlander serving curry, or a Siberian Mariachi band, or a Ghanaian sushi bar, or Japanese man in a kilt, or my friend who went salsa dancing in Mullingar: globalisation gone too far.

Some boats cross the channel... and it goes both ways! TBH the contessa is not a bad choice for such a trip on a small production boat.

There are some British designs we seem to like even more than the Brits themselves I think that most if not all Prism 28 (wooden sportsboats built in the UK during the 90s) are now French !

ToHNq3kiqNDh0rQcyIx71JLUoKCAdv3v.big.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Panoramix said:

Some boats cross the channel... and it goes both ways! TBH the contessa is not a bad choice for such a trip on a small production boat.

I now it's not a bad choice of boat, but the extreme Englishness of the Contessa makes it an extreme culture clash.  It's as if Edith Piaf started drinking tea.

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

There is something just wrong about a Frenchman sailing a Contessa 32.  Fine boats, but very English, and very not French.

It's like a Greenlander serving curry, or a Siberian Mariachi band, or a Ghanaian sushi bar, or Japanese man in a kilt, or my friend who went salsa dancing in Mullingar: globalisation gone too far.

13403081d07de75d1311a58ee96179fd.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TwoLegged said:

I now it's not a bad choice of boat, but the extreme Englishness of the Contessa makes it an extreme culture clash.  It's as if Edith Piaf started drinking tea.

There has always been a weird relationship between France and Britain that includes a reciprocal feeling of admiration, distrust and competition. Thus although we think our boats are superior we can't really say with a straight face that their boats are completely bad so some may stray away. Actually here there are quite a few Westerly Centaur some Iroquois cat (can it be more British?)

By the way Brexit impacts me badly as Worcestershire sauce and proper tea (not this weak infusion called tea south of the English channel) is now harder to find, does this make me a bad Frenchman?

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Panoramix said:

By the way Brexit impacts me badly as Worcestershire sauce and proper tea (not this weak infusion called tea south of the English channel) is now harder to find, does this make me a bad Frenchman?

I phoned Macron to report your deviant tastes, and have ben assured that you will be on your way to Bagne de Cayenne before morning ;) 

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

I phoned Macron to report your deviant tastes, and have ben assured that you will be on your way to Bagne de Cayenne before morning ;) 

You chose the wrong person, he raised a fairly big chunk of his campaing funds in London to get elected! I would rather not know what they expect from him now....

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Panoramix said:

You chose the wrong person, he raised a fairly big chunk of his campaing funds in London to get elected! I would rather not know what they expect from him now....

Raising overseas campaign funds is illegal in the UK and Ireland.  Maybe not in France.  I thought that Macron was pitching himself as Mr Clean Technocrat, after a set of crooked predecessors.

Anyway, joking aside, I do sympathise with your lack of tea and Worcester Sauce.  I drink about 100 gallons of tea a day, and most evenings I drink a Virgin Mary, which requires Worcester Sauce.  Deprivation of either would be traumatic. 

Have you considered ordering tea from Ireland?  No Brexit hassles.

Bewley's is the best tea in Dublin: https://shop.bewleys.com/

... unless you are talking to a Corkwoman, who will insist on Barry's: https://www.barrystea.ie/.  There would be some logic to to getting Barry's, since it is the family business of the late Peter Barry, who was  Minister for Foreign Affairs when the EU Single Market was signed off in 1986 ... and the EU Single Market is what allows you to import it without hassle.

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

Except the expression SA/D supports @Panoramix. The D term is only displacement, not some weighted combination of lightship and loading.

 

10 hours ago, Panoramix said:

it really depends where you start. Generally light boats will have a better SA/D than heavy ones by the times the 2 are loaded to have the same, they will probably be carrying lot of stuff.

I'm talking about sailing SA/D, not some lie printed in the brochure. That only matters at the boat show. The SA part is hard to change, the D gets bigger with stuff you bring, and the change is greater if brochure D is smaller. 

This thread has more to do with what kind of cruising you do than anything else. Combined with your definition of speed. The extremes are long distance sailing away from civilization, and daysailing port-to-port in the First World. While you can use the same boat for either, what you value will have a big effect on the boat you pick primarily for one or the other. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, MFH125 said:

There are no photos on the website and the drawing say 2013, so it seems like she may still be sailing only on paper.

Simon Miles in Port Townsend is building two of them now.  I think they are the first two...

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

Bewley's is the best tea in Dublin: https://shop.bewleys.com/

... unless you are talking to a Corkwoman, who will insist on Barry's: https://www.barrystea.ie/.  There would be some logic to to getting Barry's, since it is the family business of the late Peter Barry, who was  Minister for Foreign Affairs when the EU Single Market was signed off in 1986 ... and the EU Single Market is what allows you to import it without hassle.

I can vouch for both Bewleys and Barry's.  You can also get Lyons online too if you feel strongly about having tetrahedral shaped teabags.

I drank Barry's when I lived in Dublin.  A number of my early friends when I moved to Dublin were from Cork, and Barry's was recommended as if it were the only possible choice.  I didn't really hear of Bewley's until they reopened their place on Grafton street, and by then I was set in my ways.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TwoLegged said:

I thought that Macron was pitching himself as Mr Clean Technocrat, after a set of crooked predecessors.

They all do!

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, TwoLegged said:

Anyway, joking aside, I do sympathise with your lack of tea and Worcester Sauce.  I drink about 100 gallons of tea a day, and most evenings I drink a Virgin Mary, which requires Worcester Sauce.  Deprivation of either would be traumatic. 

Have you considered ordering tea from Ireland?  No Brexit hassles.

The only tea I get now is from an Indian shop and they only have PG tips, Jersey and Guernsey are closed due to COVID thus I can't even lobby for an early sail to stock up. I think I might well go the Irish route!

My dad who's also a tea drinker is getting older (mid 70s) and we haven't been to Ireland for a while, may be I can convince him that we need a field study next summer! Sadly it is a long way from St Malo to go to Cork (realistically more than 2 days non stop with tidal gates and wind bound not to cooperate all the way up) so it is necessary to take 2 weeks off to do it whereas the South coast of England is easy to do with just one week off.

As for Worcester sauce... Sheperd's pie which was a staple dish of the family for more than a decade is over for the time being!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are two boats that are similar in concept to the JPK, albeit smaller. The Mojito 1088 and 888. I think they could be a contender here. A bit unusual looking (the Malango line uses the same hull but different deck), they are among the most intelligently designed and very versatile smaller yachts, in my view.

fagus-felix.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Matagi said:

Here are two boats that are similar in concept to the JPK, albeit smaller. The Mojito 1088 and 888. I think they could be a contender here. A bit unusual looking (the Malango line uses the same hull but different deck), they are among the most intelligently designed and very versatile smaller yachts, in my view.

fagus-felix.jpg

Those boats offend my eye :-(  . I thought it might be the angle so had a quick look for alternative views but that confirmed my irrational prejudice. They are even ugly on the inside... so you don't get the "I'm aboard looking out at the pretty boats" perspective.

 Ah well, it matters not what I think.

Cheers,

               W.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, MFH125 said:

I drank Barry's when I lived in Dublin.  A number of my early friends when I moved to Dublin were from Cork, and Barry's was recommended as if it were the only possible choice.  I didn't really hear of Bewley's until they reopened their place on Grafton street, and by then I was set in my ways.

Isn't that what they call "grooming"?   Leading you astray into their weird Corkonian ways while you were still too inexperienced to know better? ;) :D 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, WGWarburton said:

Those boats offend my eye :-(  . I thought it might be the angle so had a quick look for alternative views but that confirmed my irrational prejudice. They are even ugly on the inside... so you don't get the "I'm aboard looking out at the pretty boats" perspective.

 Ah well, it matters not what I think.

Cheers,

               W.

I know what you mean. They look... boxy. But show me a 8.88 m boat with a tender garage that can plane. Certainly more for the looks:

Here is a boat that has never gained the reputation it deserves in my view, the FF95. A design from '91 (!), these were light-displacement in IOR prime time and I believe they would be quick enough to plane.

cul-masten-carbon-mast-ff95-07.jpg

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, WGWarburton said:

Those boats offend my eye :-(  . I thought it might be the angle so had a quick look for alternative views but that confirmed my irrational prejudice. They are even ugly on the inside... so you don't get the "I'm aboard looking out at the pretty boats" perspective.

 Ah well, it matters not what I think.

I agree with @Matagi.  A modest-sized cruising boat that planes, with dinghy garage, all-round windows, a lifting keel ... and you dislike it 'cos it doesn't have the same aesthetic as a 1960s boat?

This pair are pretty much the ideal family cruising boats.  Versatile, practical, and enough sailing fun to keep the kids interested when they become teenagers.

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

Here are two boats that are similar in concept

Those stems are horrible!  What's with the vertical flat? Just easier to mold??  I'm not sure how much extra resistance but several % at least in anything other that flat calm and slow.

image.png.fe02dbc0726c27a83ca3e0035d5e884f.png

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

Those stems are horrible!  What's with the vertical flat? Just easier to mold??  I'm not sure how much extra resistance but several % at least in anything other that flat calm and slow.

I agree that it's ugly and slow, but it's far from unique to these boats.  Similar flat noses can be found on many other recent European production boats.

I think it's a way of keeping the plumb bow which is currently fashionable, without squeezing in the lines and losing buoyancy.  Personally, I prefer the old recipe of just continuing the lines until they meet, but it seems that a plumb bow is now compulsory, whatever its downsides :(

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Zonker said:

Those stems are horrible!  What's with the vertical flat? Just easier to mold??  I'm not sure how much extra resistance but several % at least in anything other that flat calm and slow.

image.png.fe02dbc0726c27a83ca3e0035d5e884f.png

Yes, but that flat makes a fine spray that makes it look like the boat's going fast. And it makes your sunglasses permanently blurry.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, TwoLegged said:

Isn't that what they call "grooming"?   Leading you astray into their weird Corkonian ways while you were still too inexperienced to know better? ;) :D 

"ara sure, you know yerself, like.":D 

(Did I say "no comment" in hiberno-english correctly?)

 

7 hours ago, Zonker said:

Those stems are horrible!  What's with the vertical flat? Just easier to mold??  I'm not sure how much extra resistance but several % at least in anything other that flat calm and slow.

image.png.fe02dbc0726c27a83ca3e0035d5e884f.png

I don't understand why they don't just round over the corners more.  The extra volume there can't be helping anything.  Seems like the rounder shape would be easier to layup in the mould, too.

The current "style" seems to be involve a lot of sharp edges and creases, though.

 

I do think these swing keels are pretty neat.  Never lived with one, and they seem like they could be a maintenance hassle, but watching these boats dry out in videos like this is pretty cool:

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MFH125 said:

I don't understand why they don't just round over the corners more.  The extra volume there can't be helping anything.  Seems like the rounder shape would be easier to layup in the mould, too.

The current "style" seems to be involve a lot of sharp edges and creases, though.

That is the old style. New style can be found on the smaller one: https://www.idbmarine.com/fr/mojito/650/virginmojito650.php

Round enough? :D

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MFH125 said:

"ara sure, you know yerself, like.":D 

(Did I say "no comment" in hiberno-english correctly?)

 

I don't understand why they don't just round over the corners more.  The extra volume there can't be helping anything.  Seems like the rounder shape would be easier to layup in the mould, too.

The current "style" seems to be involve a lot of sharp edges and creases, though.

 

I do think these swing keels are pretty neat.  Never lived with one, and they seem like they could be a maintenance hassle, but watching these boats dry out in videos like this is pretty cool:

 

I had a boat that did that.

If the keel moves, yes it is a maintenance issue.  Everything is a compromise.

Had a lesson in hull form stability with that boat.  Lost main halyard clip to about 2m from the mast head.  So i thought I would take it into the shallows board up and use a spinnaker halyard to tip the thing over (al La dinghy) and fix it.

Convinced a couple of locals to help.  Three of us managed to get the fucking thing tipped over but it refused to come any further and still could not reach the halyard.  The boat was still floating, I thought it would be easier that way.  So I said "hang on to it and I will get the boat hook".  They did with increasingly wide eyes.  I telescoped out the boat hook, got the halyard clip and said "ok, you can ease it back now"

Well once it started to right, it just went.  Unfortunately one of the young fit guys got pretty bad rope burn that I apologised for and thanked them profusely. 

Anyway it was amazing how fucking hard it was to tip the boat over ... with the board up!

 

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

I'm not sure how much extra resistance but several % at least in anything other that flat calm and slow.

It does "push water" (word to word translation of a French expression as in "we are pushing water bring some weight aft") :

05.jpg

They obviously decided that it was not such a bad issue, I imagine it is stronger and easier to manufacture like this but then again they could have added foam or something to make it rounder while having a stout easy to build bow.

Nevertheless a pointy bow pushes water sideways so the energy is also lost. May be less of it is a loss as the vectors are more favourable. Apparently that's why the scow bow works so well, it pushes the water downward and some of the spent energy is reintegrated in the form of extra upward pressure on the rear part of the boat. I find it hard to imagine but then again when you push a boat super hard, there is an upsurge of water in the wake as if you were some kind of motorboat with a very badly trimmed motor so that theory sounds believable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MFH125 said:
20 hours ago, TwoLegged said:

Isn't that what they call "grooming"?   Leading you astray into their weird Corkonian ways while you were still too inexperienced to know better? ;) :D 

"ara sure, you know yerself, like.":D 

(Did I say "no comment" in hiberno-english correctly?)

That's pretty good, MFH.  One of my neighbours says that a lot :D 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had to look, since we started with a 27.7, this one should also be able to make the list: 

The JK 28 is an heir to 'Jollenkreuzer', large centreboarded dinghies with a cabin. This one has a ballasted centreboard (200 kg) and a gennaker. See 4:43 for proof of it planing. It has an integrated tent that makes it perfect for 3,4 day trips and raid-like sailing in large sheltered waters. 8.50 overall, 2.55 m wide, 1,000 kg displacement.

IwNGUd6p9MZY7TxgdLvD0rFPDAhunxcffukiXGMG

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminds me of this:

image.png.501abde5efc3bf1c0b492108d733dffe.png

The scow bow works well because it provides extra bouyancy (and righting moment) on a reach. It's not because of how it pushes aside water better.

if squared off bows were a good idea, the shipping world would have figured it out long ago.

Either we're all wrong or these guys are all wrong. Guess which is the smart bet?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites