Jump to content

Desirable and Undesirable Characteristics of Offshore Yachts


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Zonker said:

I'm very sorry. That's so sad but I'm glad you were around. My wife lost her step-mom while we were cruising Mexico and there was no easy way to get home in a reasonable time.

We were at my parents last night and he gave me his old hand bearing compass saying he didn't think he'd need it any more and maybe somebody in our sailing co-op could use it. It's going to be very hard when he dies; he taught me so much about working on boats and cars and houses. Lots of it I picked up by osmosis.

When I'm doing a job on the plumbing or on the car I get my daughter and say "come here and learn something" and she does. Glad to be passing on some knowledge that he instilled in me.

I didn't always appreciate every skill I learned from my dad just by watching him do it. When he was gone, however, I still had those lessons to fall back on, even if I had forgotten where I learned them.

He would take me into his woodshop to watch from the time I was a small child, including the time he severed parts of three fingers on a table saw. I never reach for the switch on my table saw without remembering that lesson. Take a deep breath, and remember that power tools can bite if you are careless.

He died before I finished building my cruising boat, but was too far gone into dementia to appreciate it even before he died. That boat may have been my magnum opus, but it was really my homage to everything I learned from him, whether I knew it or not.

Ishmael, I am so sorry for your loss.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 986
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

That in no way diminishes the validity of their choices. They are buying the boat for themselves, not for you or me. I happen to prefer a deep fin, spade rudder, tall carbon rig, paradoxically on a wo

You know who to get the best advice from? Delivery skippers. It isn't their boat, they aren't in love with her and blind to her flaws. They have to get the boat from A to B despite the weather or

This has turned into Desirable and Undesirable Characteristics of Offshore Posters.

Posted Images

On 4/19/2021 at 2:11 AM, DDW said:

The problem is, everyone's experience is limited. Nearly all recreational sailors have sailed particular kinds of boats in particular kinds of weather and had particular kinds of successes and failures with it. The sea in a storm is quite chaotic, and yacht design practice is nearly as chaotic. The sort of repeatable, carefully controlled multivariate experiment that advances knowledge quickly cannot and will not be done, except around the edges (like the tank rollover tests at Southhampton). You would need to drop 10 carefully varied designs in into the middle of a storm with measured and characterized waves and instrument the result, then do that 10 times in 10 different weather conditions. 

Because of this, all the knowledge is anecdotal, with all the unreliability that implies. With boat design changing more rapidly than in the past, the problem gets worse as the anecdotes from 1962 and now even 2002 are dated. 

I tried to do a simple thing, measure the roll excursions on my powerboat. It proved impossible to do: ............

But the predicition of boat motion given say a typical JONSWAP wave spectra along with heading and  speed is quite a refined prediction now. It's a standard exercise for any vessel.

I replied earlier to Zonker; what would a Pogo's RAO would look like in a moderately rough confused sea with little wind ? That's data that's easy enough to generate.

The worst motion for mal de mer is vertical acceleration. I've said before, a challenge to any light cruising boat fan is to sail to windward in a seaway, a trade wind seaway would be good. Then record the vertical acceleration. I've done this an several boats to validate RAO data. I now use a Samsung Android phone and the free physics toolbox app. All the sensors you need for heave, roll, pitch and yaw are in the phone  You can record the data to a CSV.

Anecdotes are not a lot of use, people pick them to promote their choice.  Jimmy Cornell noted  with his cruising surveys amongst Pacific cruisers that people in one sort of boat would rate it as perfect, he'd often meet them a year or two later in a completely different boat that they would also rate as perfect. 

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

It also ensured rich guys building new boats every year or two. :D

It also started the careers of numberless designers to feed that demand.

It was a true golden age of sailboat racing. IOR boats were much better performing than their predecessors. The fact that boats are better now is hardly relevant, it's just normal progress.

The path of progress doesn't have to go through weird deformations and multiple forms of unseaworthiness; that was an avoidable flaw of a misconceived rule.  A rule  which didn't deform and distort would still have had new boats appearing, tho possibly not as rapidly

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

So sorry to hear Ish. Good that you were near by and able to spend time with them.  I miss my folks every day.

Thanks, guys. Sorry, I mangled my language. We are here supporting my aged aunt. We weren't physically there with him, but my wife has been facetiming him at the nursing home while the plague has shut it down. Nobody in the family could see him at all for most of a year, so she was really the only one in contact except for phone calls. She would take him for walks through our garden and house, it gave him a semblance of normality.

 

 

 

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

Thanks, guys. Sorry, I mangled my language. We are here supporting my aged aunt. We weren't physically there with him, but my wife has been facetiming him at the nursing home while the plague has shut it down. Nobody in the family could see him at all for most of a year, so she was really the only one in contact except for phone calls. She would take him for walks through our garden and house, it gave him a semblance of normality.

 

 

 

Sincere condolences. Sounds like you all did a good job with what was possible, to keep spirits up and to feel close.

It's a good thing to live so that you ahve no regerets

FB- Doug

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

But the predicition of boat motion given say a typical JONSWAP wave spectra along with heading and  speed is quite a refined prediction now. It's a standard exercise for any vessel.

I replied earlier to Zonker; what would a Pogo's RAO would look like in a moderately rough confused sea with little wind ? That's data that's easy enough to generate.

The worst motion for mal de mer is vertical acceleration. I've said before, a challenge to any light cruising boat fan is to sail to windward in a seaway, a trade wind seaway would be good. Then record the vertical acceleration. I've done this an several boats to validate RAO data. I now use a Samsung Android phone and the free physics toolbox app. All the sensors you need for heave, roll, pitch and yaw are in the phone  You can record the data to a CSV.

The problem with that is that the sea state is never a perfect JONSWAP spectra, and can be much more confused than that. While you can record motion on your cell phone, you have but one instance, in one particular seaway. Like taking a pass over the bottom with a depth sounder results in one line of data. Massive data collection would color the picture more, perhaps much more. Predictions aren't everything, if I understand it that is why the JONSWAP fudge factors exist: to make theory agree with measured data. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2021 at 3:13 PM, Zonker said:

[snip]

Yep, (LWL is a better predictor of "actual" size) and it's also a good predictor of capsize. Lots of the Global Race with very "seaworthy" old school type keels, narrow beams 32-36' capsized. Bigger 45' Beneteau's probably would not have.

The size of a breaking wave required to capsize a typical sailboat is = beam of the vessel. That's the breaking part of the wave, not the total wave height. So if you have  a 10' beam, a 25' wave with the top 10' breaking is enough to flip you if it catches you beam on.

[snip]

This was, to me, one of the interesting results that came out of the Golden Globe Race.  Several cases where it seems as though these well-regarded "seaworthy" but heavy, full-keeled boats tripped over their own keels in a big, following sea.  They couldn't go fast enough to slow down the relative speed of the waves, but they weren't towing a drogue either, so they started surfing until they wiped out.  Would have been interesting if they had some similar era fin keels out there.

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

Thanks, guys. Sorry, I mangled my language. We are here supporting my aged aunt. We weren't physically there with him, but my wife has been facetiming him at the nursing home while the plague has shut it down. Nobody in the family could see him at all for most of a year, so she was really the only one in contact except for phone calls. She would take him for walks through our garden and house, it gave him a semblance of normality.

 

 

 

Condolences Ish.  It's been a tough year for issues like that.  My Dad is 91 and had a stroke a few months into Covid.  I'm finally going to be able to travel to see him for the first time in a year and half, in about 2 weeks from now.  He taught me how to sail and I was the only one of his 4 kids to catch the bug, so we did a lot together over the years, including cruising from the Chesapeake to Nova Scotia, with an epic, double-handed passage from Lake Bras D'Or to Nantucket in October one year.  He tried to give me the family boat when he couldn't handle it anymore, and I felt terrible in turning it down.  It was just way too much boat for me at that time (a Cheoy Lee Offshore 41 with a rotten deck).  I bought my boat only 2 years later and he never expressed anything but happiness for me.  His last real cruise was when he spent 4 days helping me deliver it from MA to NY.  

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

I replied earlier to Zonker; what would a Pogo's RAO would look like in a moderately rough confused sea with little wind ? That's data that's easy enough to generate.

Lumpy? I have no idea - I leave the RAO to the hydrodynamicists in the company. We seldom do any motion prediction for the smaller workboats we design. We did one for the Canadian Navy's new 24m tugs. 

Sea State 6 on the beam? "Avoid. ~50% MSI"  :)

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

but heavy, full-keeled boats tripped over their own keels in a big, following sea.  They couldn't go fast enough to slow down the relative speed of the waves, but they weren't towing a drogue either, so they started surfing until they wiped out.

I suspect the mechanism is  like "get picked up by a big breaking crest, broach and then capsize". Just watch videos of sailboats in breaking surf that capsize.  If they can keep perpendicular to the wave, they usually stay upright.

The beauty of the Jordan series drogue is that SOME part of the drogue is in the wave, and it keeps the stern straight

 

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

The problem with that is that the sea state is never a perfect JONSWAP spectra, and can be much more confused than that. W..............................

There are several wave spectra that are really useful, even simplistic models. The energy spectra functions in common use are more than adequate to identify poor design attributes and where severe adverse motions are going to occur.

If the craft shows violent responses in the RAO to say JONSWAP that's indicative enough. You don't need to know exactly how bad, just that it's bad is enough to change the design.

As for fudge factors, the spectral models are refined to match actual data. Even the old simple PM spectra has been updated recently.

 

 

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

This was, to me, one of the interesting results that came out of the Golden Globe Race.  Several cases where it seems as though these well-regarded "seaworthy" but heavy, full-keeled boats tripped over their own keels in a big, following sea.  They couldn't go fast enough to slow down the relative speed of the waves, but they weren't towing a drogue either, so they started surfing until they wiped out.  Would have been interesting if they had some similar era fin keels out there.

Heavy full-keeled boats have their merits.   They dry out nice and safely alongside, or on legs.  They heave to well.  They usually have deep bilges. They can be built with encapsulated ballast, which avoids a few maintenance headaches.

But even though the old-timers used to commend them for downwind work, they are actually a very poor choice.

A downwind boat basically wants a big, deep foil-sectioned rudder well aft, and no appendages forward of that.  Kinda like an arrow or a rocket: stuff at the back to control direction.  And it wants to be light enough to accelerate well, with low drag, and with drive from sails well fwd.

One of the best approaches to those goals is the Boreal centreboarders.  They don't have a huge rudder, but they do have  a daggerboard on each quarter, so with the centreboard raised they are almost unbroachable.

But the long keel boat has almost none of that.  Too heavy to accelerate and surf.  Rudder usually pulled or raked fwd a bit to reduce keel area.  Rudder usually barn door shaped rather than foiled, with its flow buggered up by the keel and the prop aperture.  And tons of keel area forward, in an unfoiled profile, which is a recipe for tripping over.

It would be interesting to test (somehow) whether a long keeler might be safer with a drogue.  But it does seem clear that they are unsafe to race in the Southern Ocean

 

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

This was, to me, one of the interesting results that came out of the Golden Globe Race.  Several cases where it seems as though these well-regarded "seaworthy" but heavy, full-keeled boats tripped over their own keels in a big, following sea.  They couldn't go fast enough to slow down the relative speed of the waves, but they weren't towing a drogue either, so they started surfing until they wiped out.  Would have been interesting if they had some similar era fin keels out there.

I think tripping over a keel is urban myth. They don't develop enough drag for a boat to trip over and displacement boats always trim up with speed, even full keels with brutal frontal areas.

I suspect its more due to poor directional control.

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

Heavy full-keeled boats .....  they are unsafe to race in the Southern Ocean

I believe you are vastly underestimating the potential influence of the skipper.  

The seamanship demonstrated in this race was hmm . . pretty miserable.

These boats do have some distinctive traits, and do require specific handling (there is a reason that the Pardey's developed their specific/distinctive approach).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't think the Golden Globe proved anything, except you need pretty big balls and a high tolerance to failure if you choose to go into the Southern Ocean in a 36' boat, with minimal righting moment.  Time will tell if it's even a half sensible idea in a Class 40.

While there are undoubtedly bad boats out there, if you discount the extremes of any design era, the median should be able to cope with most stuff, with vessels lost mostly coming down to luck, seamanship, maintenance, preparation, and damage history, rather than if the keel is a foot forward/back/deeper/shallower.

One man thinks a safe boat has a dry deck, plenty of stability, and a buoyant nature.  Another man thinks safety comes from easy motion and battleship strength, both will probably live to be old men anyway.  A third guy will probably do a lap in a boat with offset patio door, and think nothing of it.  A good allrounder cruising boat is by definition, 'good' at nothing, it's the ultimate compromise.

I hope I am never at sea in conditions that put my crazy notions of survival tactics to the test.  Have thumbed through most of the older books, 'The Elements of Seamanship' by Rodger Taylor is my favourite.

So if I had a new sailor friend who I wanted to give a book in the hope it might help them live longer, which would it be?

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

a book in the hope it might help them live longer, which would it be?

By a very large margin it would NOT be a book about boat characteristics and design.  It would be directed at the skipper - maintaining situational awareness, fatigue management, being pro-active rather than reactive, etc etc.  There is a whole category of such books dealing with risk/emergency/crisis/stress response.  . . . the whole "Long periods of boredom punctuated by moments of sheer terror" skill set.  However, not all of them deal with the fatigue management issues, which is distinctive to a few such situations, including being short handed in the S ocean.

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

This was, to me, one of the interesting results that came out of the Golden Globe Race.  Several cases where it seems as though these well-regarded "seaworthy" but heavy, full-keeled boats tripped over their own keels in a big, following sea.  They couldn't go fast enough to slow down the relative speed of the waves, but they weren't towing a drogue either, so they started surfing until they wiped out.  Would have been interesting if they had some similar era fin keels out there.

My boat doesn't do that, she'll put on a burst of speed and get out in front of the breaking wave. The challenge is not to stuff yourself into the wave in front of you. The issue we had was it was very hard to work to steer, an hour wore you out. It would not have been doable for a cruising couple for long, at some point they would have needed a drogue to slow down and take it easy.

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

I believe you are vastly underestimating the potential influence of the skipper.  

The seamanship demonstrated in this race was hmm . . pretty miserable.

These boats do have some distinctive traits, and do require specific handling (there is a reason that the Pardey's developed their specific/distinctive approach).

Hmm.  I am torn between on one hand bowing to your huge expertise, and on the other hand the low probability that so many experienced skippers were so incompetent.    The only way I can see to resolve this gap is to consider that what little I know of the Pardey techniques is that they mostly involved slowing down, lying ahull or using sea anchors.  Both approaches amount to taking a break from racing, and that would be counterintuitive .... but it may well be that like IOR boats, these long-keeled hulls are unsuitable to being driven hard in difficult conditions.  

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

By a very large margin it would NOT be a book about boat characteristics and design.  It would be directed at the skipper - maintaining situational awareness, fatigue management, being pro-active rather than reactive, etc etc.  There is a whole category of such books dealing with risk/emergency/crisis/stress response.  . . . the whole "Long periods of boredom punctuated by moments of sheer terror" skill set.  However, not all of them deal with the fatigue management issues, which is distinctive to a few such situations, including being short handed in the S ocean.

Before my first offshore trip as skipper I read through all the Fastnet reports and got this out of it:

The boat will take it if you can, do not EVER get off the boat unless it is a step up. Remember the guy left for dead on a boat "about to sink" who eventually came home not dead in that very boat?

Fatigue and seasickness will turn a minor problem into a disaster too, or at least you will think it is with the minimal brain function you have left.

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

Hmm.  I am torn between on one hand bowing to your huge expertise, and on the other hand the low probability that so many experienced skippers were so incompetent.    The only way I can see to resolve this gap is to consider that what little I know of the Pardey techniques is that they mostly involved slowing down, lying ahull or using sea anchors.  Both approaches amount to taking a break from racing, and that would be counterintuitive .... but it may well be that like IOR boats, these long-keeled hulls are unsuitable to being driven hard in difficult conditions.  

Go back some years . .  .and take a look at how Moitessier drove his boat (and a few others from that generation).  He was by no means timid.  But he had a sensitivity for the design which these recent skippers did not seem to have at all.

Some long-keeled hulls are plainly bad designs; as are some fin keeled boats and some lift keel boats, and some IOR's and some IMS's, etc etc.   But you are painting with way too broad a brush to say that all long keeled hulls are unsuitable.

 

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

Before my first offshore trip as skipper I read through all the Fastnet reports and got this out of it:

The boat will take it if you can, do not EVER get off the boat unless it is a step up. Remember the guy left for dead on a boat "about to sink" who eventually came home not dead in that very boat?

Fatigue and seasickness will turn a minor problem into a disaster too, or at least you will think it is with the minimal brain function you have left.

yea . . . . some years ago, Beth and I had been advising a couple getting ready for Chile, and on our final night with them they asked for any last advise . . . . I told them 'always do the exact right best thing possible to 100% quality immediately right now when you first think it might be useful no matter how tired or sick you are, most especially when you are dog tired and barfing sick'.

The trick is that you need to know what that exactly right thing to do is, and how to do it exactly right.  Some people have an innate skill and feeling for that, and others need to accumulate vast experience to be able to, and then there are some who just will never ever get it.  Even those last can get by on sheer tenacity , if they have it in huge doses, but it will not be pretty.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

 

Fatigue and seasickness will turn a minor problem into a disaster too, or at least you will think it is with the minimal brain function you have left.

This ^

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

yea . . . . some years ago, Beth and I had been advising a couple getting ready for Chile, and on our final night with them they asked for any last advise . . . . I told them 'always do the exact right best thing possible to 100% quality immediately right now when you first think it might be useful no matter how tired or sick you are, most especially when you are dog tired and barfing sick'.

The trick is that you need to know what that exactly right thing to do is, and how to do it exactly right.  Some people have an innate skill and feeling for that, and others need to accumulate vast experience to be able to, and then there are some who just will never ever get it.  Even those last can get by on sheer tenacity , if they have it in huge doses, but it will not be pretty.

This, too. ^

Link to post
Share on other sites

The discussion of the Golden Globe race here doesn't seem to be based on what actually happened:

 

Are Wiig: rolled and dismasted while hove to.

Susie Goodall: pitchpoled and dismasted while using a series drogue. 

Gregor McGuckin: rolled and dismasted while trailing warps in cross seas.

Abhilash Tomy: rolled and dismasted while lying ahull.

 

It is not obvious that any kind of "keel tripping" occurred.

 

One factor that seems to come up a lot is a breaking wave from 90 degrees to the prevailing direction. I am doubtful that any passive strategy can deal with that.

 

On GGR vs Longue Route boats: the modern boats mostly kept further north and didn't have the "benefit" of Don McIntyre's advice, so didn't seem to encounter the same conditions.

 

I believe there have been no capsizes in the Clipper race. Big boats obviously, but still interesting to compare with IMOCAs. Having someone (who isn't exhausted) actively sailing the boat could well be the most important factor after not being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Twaddle said:

 

On GGR vs Longue Route boats: the modern boats mostly kept further north ad well be the most important factor after not being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

We had a good friend in the Longue.  They had access to 'modern' weather information (which I have suspected some of the French also had in the ggr)  

But there was also quite a 'cultural' difference between the two races - with the GGR being much more 'macho' and less seamanlike.

 

One would have to dive pretty deeply into each specific incident but when I have looked, I have not been convinced that any were 'unavoidable disaster's'.   . . . As a matter of basic preparation . . . a small boat going deeply into the southern ocean, without good weather information, needs to anticipate a knockdown as a matter of course. And I was surprised at how many started off with shitty self-steering equipment (which should have been job #1 to get perfect for this race)

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

By a very large margin it would NOT be a book about boat characteristics and design.  It would be directed at the skipper - maintaining situational awareness, fatigue management, being pro-active rather than reactive, etc etc.  There is a whole category of such books dealing with risk/emergency/crisis/stress response.  . . . the whole "Long periods of boredom punctuated by moments of sheer terror" skill set.  However, not all of them deal with the fatigue management issues, which is distinctive to a few such situations, including being short handed in the S ocean.

Though I’ve not read it yet - and we’re straying off topic (albeit in a perhaps equally if not more interesting direction!  Desirable and undesirable characteristics of offshore sailors...) - here’s a good place to mention one such book since it’s from a “local” here -@Foolish’s book— as he’s obviously put a lot of thought into these topics: https://www.sfbaysss.org/resource/doc/SinglehandedTipsThirdEdition.pdf

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2021 at 4:51 PM, Borracho said:

Reading these oldtimer books is like reading a book about old computers. Weighing the virtues of a Teletype over a CRT. 8" floppies vs. 3 1/2" or a deck of Hollerith cards. The sailing world has thankfully moved on. As much to be learned from these old designers as from a Ford auto engineer from 1965. Before you jump down my throat here...I sail an almost-antique yacht, so...

Did you write this post from a Commodore 64?  Developments in computing technology have been exponential over the last 50 years (This is what Moore's Law explicitly claims, at any rate).  Development in boats and cars has been significant, but there's a reason that people might reasonably recommend a Tartan 37 as a great family boat, but no one would suggest that you pick up an Apple Lisa for your family computer.

When it comes to technical development, cars and boats seem fairly comparable to me.  Engineering have improved, regulations have changed significantly, the "modern comforts" demanded by the market have expanded and made both more complex.  There are cars (and boats) capable of doing things today that were unimaginable in the mid 80s.  The average modern consumer car, however, would be totally recognizable to someone in the 1980s.  It's the result of 30 years of refinement, not a quantum leap.

I think there's an awful lot to learn from a ford auto engineer of the 1960s, by the way.  Same for a yacht designer or an aerospace engineer of the same era.  The basics for consumer grade cars/boats (even planes) were well understood by then.   Our ability to execute has improve a lot, though.  Your basic undergraduate engineering degree of 2021 covers very little technology developed since the mid 60s -- most of what you absolutely must know to be an engineer in math, material science, control theory, structural mechanics, fluid dynamics, thermodynamics, etc. is 50+ years old.  The newer stuff is significant, but its usually too specific for an undergraduate class.  The huge exception to that has to do with computing.

Ok, I'm done quibbling with your analogy. :D

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jud - s/v Sputnik said:

Though I’ve not read it yet - and we’re straying off topic (albeit in a perhaps equally if not more interesting direction!  Desirable and undesirable characteristics of offshore crew...) - here’s a good place to mention one such book since it’s from a “local” here -@Foolish’s book— as he’s obviously put a lot of thought into these topics: https://www.sfbaysss.org/resource/doc/SinglehandedTipsThirdEdition.pdf

 

That book is very helpful even if not sailing single handed. In any case much of the times you are on watch on a short-handed boat you are are essentially single handing. 

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

I think there's an awful lot to learn from a ford auto engineer of the 1960s, by the way.  Same for a yacht designer or an aerospace engineer of the same era.

That is no way to proceed. You think any recent successful design team, say at Tesla or Toyota, tore down a 1962 Ford Galaxie 500 to see what made it tick? Laughable. Absolutely zero to be learned there. Unless re-creating some bygone era, no smart yacht designer would bother reading any dusty books searching for tech tips. The experiments have been done and the results are clearly presented in recent designs. Whatever was successful in 1962 has been preserved by its success. No need to look backwards.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Borracho said:

That is no way to proceed. You think any recent successful design team, say at Tesla or Toyota, tore down a 1962 Ford Galaxie 500 to see what made it tick? Laughable. Absolutely zero to be learned there. Unless re-creating some bygone era, no smart yacht designer would bother reading any dusty books searching for tech tips. The experiments have been done and the results are clearly presented in recent designs. Whatever was successful in 1962 has been preserved by its success. No need to look backwards.

Internal combustion has been pretty well understood for a long time.  What's changed is materials science and advances in computation (CFD) and sensors have allowed designers to put those concepts into practice.  Much of the advances have been applied to safety and emissions controls. Interestingly in many cases, today you can get away with using inferior materials due to the use of electronic controls. For example, you don't need a forged piston and can use a cheap aluminum one if you have a way to detect and prevent knock fast enough. 

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

That is no way to proceed. You think any recent successful design team, say at Tesla or Toyota, tore down a 1962 Ford Galaxie 500 to see what made it tick? Laughable. Absolutely zero to be learned there.

They didn't have to tear down a Galaxie to learn from it because engineers document what they learn in standards, memos, technical reports, etc.  People designing modern cars are absolutely making use of technologies and design standards from the 1960s and probably much earlier.  I don't know the specifics of the auto-engineering industry, but this is certainly true of both aerospace and naval architecture. 

NACA foil sections are still used frequently despite being much older than the Ford Galaxie who's technology you consider laughable.  The NACA 00XX foil profile used for most modern boat rudders was developed in the 1920s.  Abbott and Doenhoff's book on foil sections, first published in 1949 has sat on the shelf of every office I've worked in.  Are there more modern approaches to airfoil design? Yes, of course.  But I can tell you from experience that they don't produce dramatically better results.  Using a NACA foil section will usually get you 90-95% of the way to optimal.

Similarly in Naval Architecture, people still use things like the ITTC lines for estimating friction drag that were developed in the 1950s.  Nothing William Froude was publishing in the 1860s about model testing has been found wrong.  We've just developed on it.  Hell, the biggest difference between the tank test results Olin Stephens was getting in the 1960s and the ones we get today has to do with better modern sensors.

Can you believe all these industries using all this old technology?  Laughable!  What a joke.  How silly.

Fundamental technical knowledge doesn't go out of date. Older generations of engineers weren't incompetent.  They could even occasionally muster up enough insight to design a boat that you, a confirmed retrophobe and ardent technologist, might deign to own!

57 minutes ago, Borracho said:

Unless re-creating some bygone era, no smart yacht designer would bother reading any dusty books searching for tech tips. The experiments have been done and the results are clearly presented in recent designs. Whatever was successful in 1962 has been preserved by its success. No need to look backwards.

This is just demonstrably wrong.

For 50 years the only people who talked about bowsprits, let alone retractable bowsprits, were the kind of people who bathed in pine tar and trimmed their beards with a spoke shave.  Now they're found on pretty much every modern racing yacht.

Fin keels and separate rudders were being used on boats in the late 1890s, but largely fell out of fashion for ~70 years because of racing rules and the limitations of contemporary construction materials.  I'm sure the underwater profile of the Star Class and other boats from 50+ years earlier had no influence on Bill Lapworth and others who were reintroducing them in the mid 60s.

But sure, there's nothing to be gained by looking at what people have tried before.

 

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

They didn't have to tear down a Galaxie to learn from it because engineers document what they learn in standards, memos, technical reports, etc.  People designing modern cars are absolutely making use of technologies and design standards from the 1960s and probably much earlier.  I don't know the specifics of the auto-engineering industry, but this is certainly true of both aerospace and naval architecture. 

NACA foil sections are still used frequently despite being much older than the Ford Galaxie who's technology you consider laughable.  The NACA 00XX foil profile used for most modern boat rudders was developed in the 1920s.  Abbott and Doenhoff's book on foil sections, first published in 1949 has sat on the shelf of every office I've worked in.  Are there more modern approaches to airfoil design? Yes, of course.  But I can tell you from experience that they don't produce dramatically better results.  Using a NACA foil section will usually get you 90-95% of the way to optimal.

Similarly in Naval Architecture, people still use things like the ITTC lines for estimating friction drag that were developed in the 1950s.  Nothing William Froude was publishing in the 1860s about model testing has been found wrong.  We've just developed on it.  Hell, the biggest difference between the tank test results Olin Stephens was getting in the 1960s and the ones we get today has to do with better modern sensors.

Can you believe all these industries using all this old technology?  Laughable!  What a joke.  How silly.

Fundamental technical knowledge doesn't go out of date. Older generations of engineers weren't incompetent.  They could even occasionally muster up enough insight to design a boat that you, a confirmed retrophobe and ardent technologist, might deign to own!

This is just demonstrably wrong.

For 50 years the only people who talked about bowsprits, let alone retractable bowsprits, were the kind of people who bathed in pine tar and trimmed their beards with a spoke shave.  Now they're found on pretty much every modern racing yacht.

Fin keels and separate rudders were being used on boats in the late 1890s, but largely fell out of fashion for ~70 years largely because of racing rules and the limitations of contemporary construction materials.  I'm sure the underwater profile of the Star Class and other boats from 50+ years earlier had no influence on Bill Lapworth and others who were reintroducing them in the mid 60s.

But sure, there's nothing to be gained by looking at what people have tried before.

You confirmed everything I wrote...inadvertently perhaps. Yes, the successful techniques persist in 2021 designs: NACA foil sections, bowsprits, the maths, etc. The magic of evolution. No advantage in consulting any designers from the early 1900's. An astute designer in 2021 would extensively sail, study, evaluate a POGO or Gunboat, etc., not pore over Joshua Slocum's egotistical boasts about his Spray design. Same with the instant book.

Link to post
Share on other sites

FYI - Something like 95% of everything known about subsonic aerodynamics was known by the mid 1930s. I am not sure it is a good thing, but a 1935 era aeronautical engineer would be right at home over at the Piper or Cessna factory today. They aren't doing much that is different except aluminum skin is a lot more common and fabric less so. Still using the same magnetos and carbs for the most part too.

Back to boats, the idea that running aground would need $15,000 worth of NDT or the keel would soon fall off is a new idea that could stand to be scrapped in favor of the old way.

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

No advantage in consulting any designers from the early 1900's...not pore over Joshua Slocum's egotistical boasts about his Spray design. 

The esteemed Guy Bernardin went back in time to Ye Olde Wayes... :-) (“Laissez les bon vieux temps rouler,” as we say in Canadianese French...)

Originally, then some years after he ran the same vessel through the Time Machine:

 

80925B4B-7788-49F7-97FB-28A7A7AF9E45.jpeg

22753E54-C36D-4BC8-A271-29B9BE8B3CE0.jpeg

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

However, not all of them deal with the fatigue management issues, which is distinctive to a few such situations,

One of the things I realized is that nutrition and meal planning is a huge part of athletic performance that was not being covered for long distance sailors.  Although there was some literature for ultramarathon runners, their major challenge is simply in-taking enough calories.  But for singlehanded sailors it is more fatigue management.  It has been said that the  skipper who sleeps best, wins.

This is why a few years ago I did a lot of research and wrote a complete paper on Meal Planning for Improved Performance in Long Distance Singlehanded Voyages.  I actually consider this one of my most important works.  You can download it here: https://www.sugarsync.com/pf/D7718709_68878570_6823572

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Borracho, You're ascribing an opinion to me which I am not saying.  I am not arguing that there has been no technological progress since the 1960s.  That would be ridiculous.

This is what you initially wrote:

On 4/18/2021 at 4:51 PM, Borracho said:

Reading these oldtimer books is like reading a book about old computers. Weighing the virtues of a Teletype over a CRT. 8" floppies vs. 3 1/2" or a deck of Hollerith cards. The sailing world has thankfully moved on. As much to be learned from these old designers as from a Ford auto engineer from 1965. Before you jump down my throat here...I sail an almost-antique yacht, so...

My response was that development in computing is on a different scale than in naval architecture.  I offhandedly pointed out (and I'm starting to regret it) that one could, in fact, learn a great deal from engineers of the 1960s.  This is NOT because the engineers of the 1960's know more than the engineers of 2021.  It's because they did, in fact, know something about boats, cars, and airplanes in 1965.

For the record... a lot of old time books about computers are still excellent.  Books like The Art of Computer Programming (Knuth, 1962) and Algorithms and Data Stuctures (Wirth, 1976) are still widely recommended and read.  The example code is written in languages which no one should use today, but the basic principles they are outlining are still highly relevant and particularly well explained.

3 hours ago, Borracho said:

Yes, the successful techniques persist in 2021 designs: NACA foil sections, bowsprits, the maths, etc. The magic of evolution. No advantage in consulting any designers from the early 1900's.

When you use a NACA airfoil, you are consulting the knowledge of old aeronautical engineers.  Often literally.  The standard reference for NACA foils isTheory of Wing Sections by Abbott and Doenhoff which was written in 1949.  The evolutionary process you're describing is not separate from consulting historical precedent, experience, and opinion.

Bowsprits and fin keels did not persist.  They were resurrected by designers who were familiar with the history of their field and who had sufficient mental flexibility to repurpose or reevaluate design ideas that were considered old-fashioned or "failed."

3 hours ago, Borracho said:

An astute designer in 2021 would extensively sail, study, evaluate a POGO or Gunboat, etc., not pore over Joshua Slocum's egotistical boasts about his Spray design. Same with the instant book.

These aren't mutually exclusive.  It is possible to both study modern designs and read Slocum/Herreshoff/Farmer/whoever.  The designer who does both is probably better equipped to create good boats and push the field forward than someone who only does one or the other.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/19/2021 at 10:50 AM, Cruisin Loser said:

Will the boat do that on autopilot? Will it go that fast, safely, with a husband and wife offshore who cannot be trimming and steering constantly? Serious  question, because I've only ever sailed leadmines offshore.

Hiya Cruising,

Up to and into the 30's yes, and better than me (which might not be a high bar :) ). When the wind/sea state picked up I'd engage the pilot and then stand in the cabinway and watch the helm, adjusting everything till the wheel was moving a few inches at a time. The big difference between the electronic brain and me was it would react earlier and with less input, ie: as soon as the heel of the boat changed from a passing wave picking up a corner of the boat.    

There were a couple of things you had to keep in mind:

- Hard core VMG mode doesn't work well in big seas. If I was set to say 40-45 TWA, going over a wave can push you head to wind and every now and then the pilot could struggle to put enough helm into it to correct it. As the sea state increased I'd add some buffer in and fall off to 55-60 TWA. It would handle that all day. Same thing for DDW, I wouldn't have the pilot on below 160TWA in big seas. 

-Shit in-shit out still holds true. The pilot is only as good as the inputs, and the input sensors all have a bonkers amount of correction and sample rate adjustments you can apply. It took time to get the optimal settings worked out. We used to get a lot of upwash over the masthead when running deep with a full main which would throw out your Apparent wind speed/angle, so I had to work out an autopilot mode for that for example.  

- Comfort. Like the inputs, the output (helm response) is adjustable. You could set it to aggressive and in big seas it would track on rails but the motion is violent. Or you could back off to a more leisurely setting so you can make a cup of tea but the course track would be more vague and wander about the heading somewhat. That was the key to running close-hauled or deep when you had to, simply set the AP to be more aggressive. Big difference in helm response. 

 But in short, absolutely I trusted the AP in big seas without a full crew. 

Cheers!

SB

Edit: I only used it once in 40 knots plus, and that was on a broad reach under white sails with too much sail up and it handled it fine. You're planing though and bow up, so the pilot isn't working that hard bizarrely. But man there is a big difference from 30's to 40's, 30's is enjoyable, 40's is not.       

 

   

 

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

For the record... a lot of old time books about computers are still excellent.  Books like The Art of Computer Programming (Knuth, 1962) and Algorithms and Data Stuctures (Wirth, 1976) are still widely recommended and read. 

Knuth? You have wandered into the weeds. Yeah, read Knuth to tweak your 8085 qsort routine. He is not wrong, just irrelevant in 2021. As irrelevant as yesteryear designer’s now quaint ideas of offshore yacht characteristics. Studying history can be interesting. Restorations can be celebrated. But reality has moved on.

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

Knuth? You have wandered into the weeds. Yeah, read Knuth to tweak your 8085 qsort routine. He is not wrong, just irrelevant in 2021. As irrelevant as yesteryear designer’s now quaint ideas of offshore yacht characteristics. Studying history can be interesting. Restorations can be celebrated. But reality has moved on.

Do you ever respond to people's main points, or just side comments?

Whether reality has moved on or not, you clearly have.  God bless, man.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/19/2021 at 10:06 AM, TwoLegged said:

The only Julian Everett boat I ever saw up close was an Eliminator 32.   There's a good page on it at https://julianeveritt.com/2017/02/07/eliminator-32/ ... which confirms my recollection of its warped shape.

This one?

https://www.facebook.com/653448044/posts/10157939898888045/

 That angle brings out your concerns really well,  I think...?

That boat was for sale with an asking price of 8000 Euro or so last year. The ad shows up if googled,  though withdrawn. 

Cheers, 

              W.

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

nutrition and meal planning is a huge part of athletic performance

Really nice.  Great contribution, as has been all your work - much appreciated.

I am a long distant bicyclist (was doing 8000miles/year before covid).  Mental attitude (mostly the discipline to train consistently - to follow the plan)  would be the #1 factor. 2nd would be nutrition and recovery, HUGE issues there.  You can't put out power (or think well) unless you are properly fueled. 3rd would probably be training methodology (a surprisingly complicated topic but really more 'icing on the cake' so long as you were already simply putting the work in).  The bike is way way down the list.

As a sailor I have to say I was not very conscious about nutrition.  But looking back it was not too bad, probably because I had elite coaching when I was young, and some small amount of that just stuck with me.

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

As a sailor I have to say I was not very conscious about nutrition.

Thanks for the nice comments.  If you've read the study on SHTP racers in my singlehanded book you realize just how much of a role that  lethargy plays.   I faced this myself and realized that we need to do something about it.  If proper meal planning can reduce lethargy but even just 5%, the overall results would be dramatic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Really wish I didn't come across this thread when I had things to do... Just spent the last 6 hours reading the Mariner's Weather Handbook and comparing to the current NOAA Pacific Charts...

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Twaddle said:

It is a little off Jud's topic . . . But just while I was writing something else - I will include a few of the comments here. I dont mean to be 'preachy' here (I apologize it it sounds preachy and critical), but represents 'current' thinking on such situations.

It is not obvious that any kind of "keel tripping" occurred.

It is likely that the 4 skippers below used the storm tactics they did because they did not feel their boat designs could safely run off unconstrained in big seas.

Abhilash Tomy: rolled and dismasted while lying ahull.

You can lie ahull in unpleasant but not breaking seas - but we have known for almost 100 years now that you should NOT lie ahull in a small boat in breaking waves, unless you are willing and able to take a full 360 roll.  Excuse me but this was just plain bad practice.

Are Wiig: rolled and dismasted while hove to.

Hove-to is slightly better, if your boat is big enough compared to the waves to be able to hold her head up when getting hit . . . but with these size boats in a southern ocean storm it just does not add up.  If this was going to be your tactic then you should have known there was a point when you needed to use a para-anchor to hold the head up.

Susie Goodall: pitchpoled and dismasted while using a series drogue. 

She was let down by her series drogue supplier.  It had an obvious design flaw/weak point (which as a skipper where the buck stops for everything - she also should have known).  She was the only one to use what is considered 'the modern solution'.  But, see discussion below, may not have been the best macro met option, even if it had been properly built.

Gregor McGuckin: rolled and dismasted while trailing warps in cross seas.

He appears to not have split the several breaking wave trains correctly.  He seems to have put the main train behind him, which caused a secondary train to be on his beam - that can be (and was here bad).  You want to split any breaking wave systems so that none are on the beam.

For Susie and Gregor, running might not have been a very good macro tactic if they were in the dangerous semicircle.  It would have prolonged their exposure and put them into potentially progressively worse conditions. It is not clear to me from their commentary if they understood their met situation in much detail other than they were in the shit.  In bigger boats forereaching might have been the best macro solution for these designs and this situation (and worked better than running in the Sydney even in modern boats) - but I dont know if they were big enough to pull it off given the conditions (this is the exact situation the Pardey para-anchor technique was designed for - a small boat, which can't run off safely, in waves too big to simply heave to in).

 If they were simply too small for this - the best option would ofc been to have enough met information to just give the storm a miss.  In the southern ocean, the big blows are perhaps the most predictable of anywhere in the world.  You can see them coming from days away.  

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Elegua said:

Internal combustion has been pretty well understood for a long time.  What's changed is materials science and advances in computation (CFD) and sensors have allowed designers to put those concepts into practice.  Much of the advances have been applied to safety and emissions controls. Interestingly in many cases, today you can get away with using inferior materials due to the use of electronic controls. For example, you don't need a forged piston and can use a cheap aluminum one if you have a way to detect and prevent knock fast enough. 

None of that gets you over 400 HP and over 20 MPG out of a pushrod small block.

There have been major advances in every aspect of car design over the past 30 years.

Well, except weight that is - Keeriste have cars gotten heavy.

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

.............. no smart yacht designer would bother reading any dusty books searching for tech tips. The experiments have been done and the results are clearly presented in recent designs. Whatever was successful in 1962 has been preserved by its success. No need to look backwards.

The science hasn't changed, validated test results from the 1960's on are often used as references in current yacht design papers.

Designers in the transition period were stuck between modern knowledge and often very conservative clients. It takes a charismatic designer to convince a client to let them move the rudder away from the keel and put it on a skeg. S&S didn't manage this till what, the 70's . Van de Stadt even removed the skeg in the same era to the condemnation of many at the time.

Balanced or Partially balanced rudders  were roundly condemned by some popular designers as having no place on a sailboat. A decade later they all did it. The problem was the designers and the clients. The technical  and research material is as valid today as it was in 1970.

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember when the Valiant 40 was condemned as dangerously light and unseaworthy offshore because of the fin & skeg?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had a presentation by the Dogbark owners (ex RTW boat) about their attempt to go through the NW Passage.  When that fell through due to weather and time they sailed Alaska to Hawaii and were going to winter over, some friends were heading to the South Pacific so they changed plans and provisioned and went south.  They then sailed back to Hawaii, back to Alaska and down the inside passage to home in the PNW.  The big takeaway is SPEED is good and a fast passage maker makes a lot of miles easy.  They sailed Hawaii to the Marquesas in under 11 days.  Similar passages back uphill.

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

Remember when the Valiant 40 was condemned as dangerously light and unseaworthy offshore because of the fin & skeg?

I think it is more often overly conservative designers being pushed hard by clients that moves the development. I recall (some magazine glitz piece) that Lapworth had to be pushed by hard by Jensen to "lighten" the Cal 40 as much as they did. And then after making that significant contribution to the revolution did not like the ULDB developments at all. A stodgy conservative bunch, those guys. The downside of customers and clients making the choices is exemplified by that booze cruise cat ^^^ above. (Although, scientifically, the 24 sailors on that fun and beautiful classic are likely far better at executing a booze cruise...in my professional opinion.)

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

Fin keels and separate rudders were being used on boats in the late 1890s, but largely fell out of fashion for ~70 years because of racing rules and the limitations of contemporary construction materials.  I'm sure the underwater profile of the Star Class and other boats from 50+ years earlier had no influence on Bill Lapworth and others who were reintroducing them in the mid 60s.

This is one of the issues in yacht design that is absent (to a large extent) in other engineering efforts. Yacht design is less driven by science and more by fad and racing rules, resulting in enormous and decades long excursions into the nearly absurd. You have to be asleep at the wheel not to recognize this even in today's offerings. In some cases the NA knows better, but he/she works for a client that doesn't. The series builder wants to sell boats, for the most part doesn't really care how they sail, as long as they sail out of the showroom. The end user has read too many ads in magazines, and today's end user is probably buying a 45'er as their very first boat. There are only a few niche corners of sailing that are truly driven by science and results. 

The largest changes in yachts by far in the last 100 years have been due to materials science advances developed in other fields, not any epiphanies in the knowledge of sailing. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Offshore cruising is not a zero-sum game, and there is no one-size-fits-all solution to the cruising boat choice dilemma.

If you get to the end of your intended voyage with both the boat and crew intact, you had a boat that did the job for you. Bottom line, that's all you can ask.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

None of that gets you over 400 HP and over 20 MPG out of a pushrod small block.

There have been major advances in every aspect of car design over the past 30 years.

Well, except weight that is - Keeriste have cars gotten heavy.

Sorry, not following. Bolt-ons will get you that out of an LS1. 400 at the wheel with 20mpg is not difficult.  Basically Chevy built in every tuner modification invented over the last 50 years into the stock LS series engines.  

Didn't say there weren't advances. Materials science and ECUs allowed engine builders to implement designs they already understood. 

 

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

You want to split any breaking wave systems so that none are on the beam.

Heaving to as well, there's usually one good and one bad option dictated by the primary cross sea. I don't think I've ever seen that mentioned in any of the sailing how to books.

 

 

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

Heaving to as well, there's usually one good and one bad option dictated by the primary cross sea. I don't think I've ever seen that mentioned in any of the sailing how to books.

 

 

yes, exact - and also if there is a frontal system coming, with a wind shift, you want to be positioned to accept that shift gracefully.

It was always something we thought about when we had multiple waves trains and/or frontal systems coming.

I remember this being mentioned in some storm book I read way back when, cant remember which one . . .but you are right it is not commonly brought up.

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

I remember this being mentioned in some storm book I read way back when, cant remember which one . . .but you are right it is not commonly brought up.

Pretty sure that was in Heavy Weather Sailing by K. Adlard Coles.

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

But man there is a big difference from 30's to 40's, 30's is enjoyable, 40's is not.       

Fun fact:  when wind speed doubles, the force of the wind increases by the square.  So, going from 20 kts to 40 kts, the force of the wind on the sails goes up four times...and so on....

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, WGWarburton said:
On 4/19/2021 at 10:06 AM, TwoLegged said:

The only Julian Everett boat I ever saw up close was an Eliminator 32.   There's a good page on it at https://julianeveritt.com/2017/02/07/eliminator-32/ ... which confirms my recollection of its warped shape.

This one?

https://www.facebook.com/653448044/posts/10157939898888045/

 That angle brings out your concerns really well,  I think...?

That boat was for sale with an asking price of 8000 Euro or so last year. The ad shows up if googled,  though withdrawn. 

The boat I saw was a yellow or cream colour, and an Irish boat.  But that was in the late 1970s, and the intervening 40+ years is long enough for a switch to UK sail numbers and a radical repaint.

Yes, that angle does show the weird hull shape.   But at that sort of money, the easily-handled rig may make it all a decent package for club use.   Much better than wrestling genoas on a Club Shamrock

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

yes, exact - and also if there is a frontal system coming, with a wind shift, you want to be positioned to accept that shift gracefully.

It was always something we thought about when we had multiple waves trains and/or frontal systems coming.

I remember this being mentioned in some storm book I read way back when, cant remember which one . . .but you are right it is not commonly brought up.

Reminds me of pre-satellite navigation - I once had to make a landfall with 72 hours of dead reckoning after last celestial, and crossing an ocean current too. We had WFAX, so we deliberately aimed to offset to what was predicted to be upwind of our destination, so that when we found land we'd be certain which way to turn and sail downwind to patrol the coast and find the harbor. Nailed it 6 miles upwind of the harbor entrance!

Link to post
Share on other sites

1930 Waco:

image.png.56045aff058bf120e992aea0c287e29f.png

2021 Waco:

image.png.efb4cfc854c170120fe5fd69a1a70966.png

The radio is better in the 2021 version ;)

Where I work we still have Cobol programmers too.

Turbocharging, supercharging, 4 valves per cylinder, and a whole shitload of "the newest thing" in cars is stuff that actually predates WW II. There were even electronic wastegates in WW II. With the notable exception of the now-extinct Concorde, passenger aircraft have not gotten any faster than the old beaters from the 1950s.

I think designing anything not made from microcircuits isn't as divorced from the past as some of you seem to think. Hell, Baltimore Clippers were the "extreme" boats of their day two centuries ago and earned a well deserved reputation as barely seaworthy boats that needed expert handling way way before the VOR.

 

 

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

Sorry, not following. Bolt-ons will get you that out of an LS1. 400 at the wheel with 20mpg is not difficult. 

We (or at least I) were talking about 30 years ago and earlier.

Getting 400 RW HP out of an early small block made it almost unlivable on the street - needed a cam so lumpy it wouldn't produce enough vacuum to run power brakes..

And it would have gotten about 8 MPG and produced huge pollution.

I repeat - everything about cars has been dramatically improved over that span.

Except weight.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SloopJonB said:

We (or at least I) were talking about 30 years ago and earlier.

Getting 400 RW HP out of an early small block made it almost unlivable on the street - needed a cam so lumpy it wouldn't produce enough vacuum to run power brakes..

And it would have gotten about 8 MPG and produced huge pollution.

I repeat - everything about cars has been dramatically improved over that span.

Except weight.

True. But as I said, it's not the engine. It's the sensors and the injections. For example, 30 years ago you had to guess your AFR across the RPM range. Today you can calibrate your fueling curve based on real-time data. My point was 30 years ago, everyone had a good idea how to extract power but couldn't implement it.  It took real skill and guesswork. Today, even a moron like myself can read a log and adjust the parameters. 

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

With the notable exception of the now-extinct Concorde, passenger aircraft have not gotten any faster than the old beaters from the 1950s.

Not faster, but AIUI they use a LOT less fuel per passenger mile

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

This is one of the issues in yacht design that is absent (to a large extent) in other engineering efforts. Yacht design is less driven by science and more by fad and racing rules,...................

And other rules like marina charges, regulatory rules. licensing and insurance.

 

The plumb bow is a good topic for a discussion of fashion and rule driven design.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

I think designing anything not made from microcircuits isn't as divorced from the past as some of you seem to think. Hell, Baltimore Clippers were the "extreme" boats of their day two centuries ago and earned a well deserved reputation as barely seaworthy boats that needed expert handling way way before the VOR.

Do you remember the Pride sinking in 1986? I knew one of the survivors. Quite the story, sailing with the hatches open, a knockdown, down she went. Four dead.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pride_of_Baltimore#Sinking

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

Do you remember the Pride sinking in 1986? I knew one of the survivors. Quite the story, sailing with the hatches open, a knockdown, down she went. Four dead.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pride_of_Baltimore#Sinking

9B3F422B-5C6A-4B45-8632-1B3358F4BEEB_1_105_c.thumb.jpeg.21aa8bc5ba5853d4083ff73c9a3f5b8a.jpeg

 

Lynx, Baltimore Clipper type designed by Melbourne Smith who also drew the Pride. Swiftest of 1809 across the dock from the swiftest of 2009....

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

It seems like if a boat isn't a racing boat, it is designed for the charter market and mainly needs 4 heads and 4 showers in a 40 foot boat :rolleyes:

My slip neighbors just bought a new Beneteau 38.1, not a piece of wood down below and the owner who has sailed across the Pacific commented that there were no hand rails on the overhead.  Guess it is meant to sail gently from one protected harbor to the next so you don't need anything to hold on to.  Looked kind of like a cheap trailer "downstairs".  The owners were a little sheepish about it.

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

This is one of the issues in yacht design that is absent (to a large extent) in other engineering efforts. Yacht design is less driven by science and more by fad and racing rules, resulting in enormous and decades long excursions into the nearly absurd. You have to be asleep at the wheel not to recognize this even in today's offerings. In some cases the NA knows better, but he/she works for a client that doesn't. The series builder wants to sell boats, for the most part doesn't really care how they sail, as long as they sail out of the showroom. The end user has read too many ads in magazines, and today's end user is probably buying a 45'er as their very first boat. There are only a few niche corners of sailing that are truly driven by science and results. 

The largest changes in yachts by far in the last 100 years have been due to materials science advances developed in other fields, not any epiphanies in the knowledge of sailing. 

To add to this, since sailing is ultimately a leisure activity, the nature of the economy has a lot to do with it too. How much disposable income and leisure time the middle and upper middle class have has a lot to do with what kind of boats and boating are popular.  It's hard to sell someone on the virtues of an offshore cruising boat when they get two weeks of vacation per year.  Interestingly, the wealthy in the US are working longer hours and taking less time off than ever before.  That doesn't mean they're going to give up the sailboat, but it probably changes what is appealing to them in a boat.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, kent_island_sailor said:

1930 Waco:

image.png.56045aff058bf120e992aea0c287e29f.png

2021 Waco:

image.png.efb4cfc854c170120fe5fd69a1a70966.png

The radio is better in the 2021 version ;)

Where I work we still have Cobol programmers too.

Turbocharging, supercharging, 4 valves per cylinder, and a whole shitload of "the newest thing" in cars is stuff that actually predates WW II. There were even electronic wastegates in WW II. With the notable exception of the now-extinct Concorde, passenger aircraft have not gotten any faster than the old beaters from the 1950s.

I think designing anything not made from microcircuits isn't as divorced from the past as some of you seem to think. Hell, Baltimore Clippers were the "extreme" boats of their day two centuries ago and earned a well deserved reputation as barely seaworthy boats that needed expert handling way way before the VOR.

 

 

GA aircraft design has been as affected by regulation as sailing as been affected by racing rules. In aviation, the role of rule makers is played by the slow, and very conservative FAA certification process. Your brand new Cessna comes with an engine based on 1930s technology. Things like fuel injection and computer controls are just starting to show up. And a 100hp airplane engine cost 10 times as much as a LA crate engine, and has to be torn down completely for overhaul the equivalent of every 30K-50K miles.

Discussed here: 

 

 

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

Do you remember the Pride sinking in 1986? I knew one of the survivors. Quite the story, sailing with the hatches open, a knockdown, down she went. Four dead.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pride_of_Baltimore#Sinking

There were several bad events about that time. It turned out that sailing 19th century vessels in the 20th century is just as hazardous as it was sailing them back in the day.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/20/2021 at 4:32 AM, estarzinger said:

yea . . . . some years ago, Beth and I had been advising a couple getting ready for Chile, and on our final night with them they asked for any last advise . . . . I told them 'always do the exact right best thing possible to 100% quality immediately right now when you first think it might be useful no matter how tired or sick you are, most especially when you are dog tired and barfing sick'.

The trick is that you need to know what that exactly right thing to do is, and how to do it exactly right.  Some people have an innate skill and feeling for that, and others need to accumulate vast experience to be able to, and then there are some who just will never ever get it.  Even those last can get by on sheer tenacity , if they have it in huge doses, but it will not be pretty.

One of the “classic” books on big-objective alpine rock/ice climbing (Extreme Alpinism, by Mark Twight) starts out with the simple sentence, “Climbing is a mental game.”  (Follow that up with his protege, Steve House’s book, “Training for the Uphill Athlete”, for ultramarathoners and ski mountaineers, and it’s a good picture of the basics required... Some cross overs there to sailing.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, SemiSalt said:

GA aircraft design has been as affected by regulation as sailing as been affected by racing rules. In aviation, the role of rule makers is played by the slow, and very conservative FAA certification process. Your brand new Cessna comes with an engine based on 1930s technology. Things like fuel injection and computer controls are just starting to show up. And a 100hp airplane engine cost 10 times as much as a LA crate engine, and has to be torn down completely for overhaul the equivalent of every 30K-50K miles.

Discussed here: 

 

 

Flying and sailing have a lot in common, but aircraft ownership is a different animal.

You don't normally invite your friends over to sit around in the cockpit of your airplane and have a drink. And you don't have a beer while flying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, accnick said:

Flying and sailing have a lot in common, but aircraft ownership is a different animal.

You don't normally invite your friends over to sit around in the cockpit of your airplane and have a drink. And you don't have a beer while flying.

And airplanes tend to receive inspection and maintenance prior to component failure. Imagine checking a marine engine for visible faults, draining sumps, inspecting the steering systems, s