ParaHandy
Well-Known Member
Re: bakewell-white .. thankyou nm
.
<hr width=100% size=1>
.
<hr width=100% size=1>
modern yacht design
- Thread starter Birdseye
- Start date
jamesjermain
Well-Known Member
200 miles a day
Just to pick up on your points on water ballast and 200 miles a day, YM is publishing an article in the Febraury issue in which Nigel Irens and Stephen Jones discuss the factors which could lead to more speed from the next generation of moderate to large cruising yachts.
<hr width=100% size=1>JJ
Just to pick up on your points on water ballast and 200 miles a day, YM is publishing an article in the Febraury issue in which Nigel Irens and Stephen Jones discuss the factors which could lead to more speed from the next generation of moderate to large cruising yachts.
<hr width=100% size=1>JJ
qsiv
Well-Known Member
Re: 200 miles a day
.. but water ballast is an anthema to cruisers - it's complex, prone to leaking, takes up significant volume just where you want it for accomodation (unless you are ONLY talking about longitudinal trim tanks), and adds weight - just when you want less in order to go faster. One exception are the Dashew / Beowolf boats (actually it might have been a Chuck Paine derivative), that pump their fresh water to one side or the other. When you do get a knockdown you are likely to wind up with your water ballast on the LOW side, making righting complex, as it is likely to be too low to drain freely by gravity.
Canting keels on the other hand REDUCE all up weight allowing rigs to be smaller and lighter, which leads to smaller lighter, less expensive deck gear,
<hr width=100% size=1>
.. but water ballast is an anthema to cruisers - it's complex, prone to leaking, takes up significant volume just where you want it for accomodation (unless you are ONLY talking about longitudinal trim tanks), and adds weight - just when you want less in order to go faster. One exception are the Dashew / Beowolf boats (actually it might have been a Chuck Paine derivative), that pump their fresh water to one side or the other. When you do get a knockdown you are likely to wind up with your water ballast on the LOW side, making righting complex, as it is likely to be too low to drain freely by gravity.
Canting keels on the other hand REDUCE all up weight allowing rigs to be smaller and lighter, which leads to smaller lighter, less expensive deck gear,
<hr width=100% size=1>
Birdseye
Well-Known Member
" One aspect of the questions put by Birdseye is that in relative terms yachts are as expensive now as fifty years ago while cars are almost universally affordable."
I'm not sure that this is correct.Certainly, its my impression that you can get a 40ft Bav for a much lower multiple of the average wage now than a 40 ft Moody would have been in the 60's for example. Part of that is down to volume - the Henry Ford approach to boatbuilding, and part is down to technology albeit of the production engineering sort.
And I always discount the hearsay reorts of the "I tried this long keelr" type, not because I dont believe the story, but because they are rarely dispassionate analyses of pro and con. My stories about the seaworthyness of multihulls probably comes into the same category. To me, the real evidence of the seaworthy nature of the best of modern design is the performance in the single handed races.
I think the comment about load carrying capability is a very valid one. Certainly, it is a real limit on my cat which, by modern standards , is a heavy old tub. Just filling the water tanks makes a genuine half knot speed difference. Mind you, which will sail better - a modern 40ft high tech boat displacement 6T carrying 1 t load, or a similar old style boat with a 12 T displacement and a 1 t load? The first will feel the extra load more, but the latter will still have to move around an extra 6 tonnes.
I was really struck by the performance of a Farrier tri that I once sailed on. Speeds off the wind were in the 16 knot range consistently, and at that speed the boat was easy to handle, great fun to sail, and you could go twice as far in a day. Cr*p accomodation, poor load carrying, but fun in a way that the older heavier boats I have sailed never are. And surprisingly good in a 47 knot blow.
I still think the key issue is the size of the investment we make. When I had some connection with the house construction industry, I found it a poor customer for new technology because the average punter didnt want to take any risk (that he was aware of, that is) with the major investment of his life. To many of us, boats are almost as big a decision, so we play safe. Helped by the age we are when we take the decision.
<hr width=100% size=1>
I'm not sure that this is correct.Certainly, its my impression that you can get a 40ft Bav for a much lower multiple of the average wage now than a 40 ft Moody would have been in the 60's for example. Part of that is down to volume - the Henry Ford approach to boatbuilding, and part is down to technology albeit of the production engineering sort.
And I always discount the hearsay reorts of the "I tried this long keelr" type, not because I dont believe the story, but because they are rarely dispassionate analyses of pro and con. My stories about the seaworthyness of multihulls probably comes into the same category. To me, the real evidence of the seaworthy nature of the best of modern design is the performance in the single handed races.
I think the comment about load carrying capability is a very valid one. Certainly, it is a real limit on my cat which, by modern standards , is a heavy old tub. Just filling the water tanks makes a genuine half knot speed difference. Mind you, which will sail better - a modern 40ft high tech boat displacement 6T carrying 1 t load, or a similar old style boat with a 12 T displacement and a 1 t load? The first will feel the extra load more, but the latter will still have to move around an extra 6 tonnes.
I was really struck by the performance of a Farrier tri that I once sailed on. Speeds off the wind were in the 16 knot range consistently, and at that speed the boat was easy to handle, great fun to sail, and you could go twice as far in a day. Cr*p accomodation, poor load carrying, but fun in a way that the older heavier boats I have sailed never are. And surprisingly good in a 47 knot blow.
I still think the key issue is the size of the investment we make. When I had some connection with the house construction industry, I found it a poor customer for new technology because the average punter didnt want to take any risk (that he was aware of, that is) with the major investment of his life. To many of us, boats are almost as big a decision, so we play safe. Helped by the age we are when we take the decision.
<hr width=100% size=1>
Peppermint
Well-Known Member
Like in most things we talk like we want excelence and then buy cheap.
Boats have become more user friendly with lighter gear more space and reliable engines. I'd say that on the whole they are more close winded and require less skill to sail than many older designs. As a result I'd think that passage times are quicker on short to medium trips.
Many of the pudding boats are more a result of a mixture of cost accounting, production engineering and marketing focus and as a result quite suite your modern sailor. If you want a one off you can have one but you'll pay through the nose and likely find it hard to sell if it's at all unusual.
Me I'd like to cruise an Open 60 but thats because I quite often get bored between leaving and arriving.
<hr width=100% size=1>
Boats have become more user friendly with lighter gear more space and reliable engines. I'd say that on the whole they are more close winded and require less skill to sail than many older designs. As a result I'd think that passage times are quicker on short to medium trips.
Many of the pudding boats are more a result of a mixture of cost accounting, production engineering and marketing focus and as a result quite suite your modern sailor. If you want a one off you can have one but you'll pay through the nose and likely find it hard to sell if it's at all unusual.
Me I'd like to cruise an Open 60 but thats because I quite often get bored between leaving and arriving.
<hr width=100% size=1>
Twister_Ken
Well-Known Member
Don\'t make me larf
Ah, yes, the seaworthiness of modern single handed racing designs. Like all the multihulls (yea ALL the multihulls) that failed to finish the whatever-the-last-transat-was-called (the one that oor Ellen won). Ellen, of course, dropped the rig on her attempt at the Jules Verne (fully crewed) and broke a dagger board on Kingfisher in the Around Alone. No doubt Tony Bullimore has a thing or two to say about seaworthy solo racing boats. And how many of the mini-transat boats were abandoned or turned back last time?
And having sailed short distances aboard one or two of the old Whitbread boats, I must say that they're not built for relaxing cruising. Being below decks is like living in a drum kit. That's being played. Badly. While bouncing down a flight of stairs.
<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>
Ah, yes, the seaworthiness of modern single handed racing designs. Like all the multihulls (yea ALL the multihulls) that failed to finish the whatever-the-last-transat-was-called (the one that oor Ellen won). Ellen, of course, dropped the rig on her attempt at the Jules Verne (fully crewed) and broke a dagger board on Kingfisher in the Around Alone. No doubt Tony Bullimore has a thing or two to say about seaworthy solo racing boats. And how many of the mini-transat boats were abandoned or turned back last time?
And having sailed short distances aboard one or two of the old Whitbread boats, I must say that they're not built for relaxing cruising. Being below decks is like living in a drum kit. That's being played. Badly. While bouncing down a flight of stairs.
<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>
alec
Well-Known Member
I think you make a very valid point about sail areas in modern high tec boats. The keel ,or the underpart that has a big weight attached to it , has grown massively as a way of carrying sail and not as a foil system. The reason that many cruiser racers out perform others is perhaps more to do with sail area than hull shape.
I suppose individual choices are dictated by lifestyle and philosophy. In my own case, a moderate long keel and displacement seems to suit my single-handed sailing. As the movements are much slower I get less tired than when I owned a modern boat. I can also go sailing in higher winds than I used to feel comfortable with. Thereby getting more sailing in. If things get bad she heaves to beautifully. I thoroughly enjoyed the other boat and in different circumstances would go for one again.
With regard to modern car advances, there appears to be a rather depressing downside. Although stopping distances etc have improved dramatically, pedestrian deaths are at an all time high and continuing to rise. This is demonstrated in many towns with flower shrines to the dead becoming quite common.
It seems that whenever we get a benefit we soon cancel it out by going faster or worrying less about being injured because of air bags, cockpit protection etc. Unfortunately, the poor pedestrian is still at a standstill technology wise.
<hr width=100% size=1>
I suppose individual choices are dictated by lifestyle and philosophy. In my own case, a moderate long keel and displacement seems to suit my single-handed sailing. As the movements are much slower I get less tired than when I owned a modern boat. I can also go sailing in higher winds than I used to feel comfortable with. Thereby getting more sailing in. If things get bad she heaves to beautifully. I thoroughly enjoyed the other boat and in different circumstances would go for one again.
With regard to modern car advances, there appears to be a rather depressing downside. Although stopping distances etc have improved dramatically, pedestrian deaths are at an all time high and continuing to rise. This is demonstrated in many towns with flower shrines to the dead becoming quite common.
It seems that whenever we get a benefit we soon cancel it out by going faster or worrying less about being injured because of air bags, cockpit protection etc. Unfortunately, the poor pedestrian is still at a standstill technology wise.
<hr width=100% size=1>
Other threads that may be of interest
