ARC 2016 the boats and the performances

[SV DestinyAscen]

I won't be surprised if outremer decides to donate some pro crews for a new owner boat making their first crossing next year. Since they're so obsessed about it. Then someone in a custom boat or a very disciplined light cat beats them and they'll cry foul about fake hours.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by SV DestinyAscen

I won't be surprised if outremer decides to donate some pro crews for a new owner boat making their first crossing next year. Since they're so obsessed about it. Then someone in a custom boat or a very disciplined light cat beats them and they'll cry foul about fake hours.

That's why I say that the engine hours on the racing division should not be only declared but verified. Than one has to accept the results.

[yeloya]

Originally Posted by Palarran

I spent quite a bit of time just now looking at the Lagoon 62's progress and the associated wind at that time. I have to say, it appears to be believable to me. I'm pretty sure Palarran could do those speeds under sail with a crew who could fly the spinnaker all night. Add to that a Code 0 that maybe the other 62's might not have. IMO though, as hard as it it for me to agree with Polux, the Outremer doesn't seem to have hit the speeds I would have guessed. Yeloya, in that video you posted, you new Catana was hauling ass. I don't see that same speed with 20 knot winds on Nemo. Same for Allegra. Both these boats hunted way north for the wind while Ludanka ran the rhum line. Ludanka sailed 2723nm compared to Nemo at 2927nm.

Hi David,

I haven't sailed the L 62 but sailed FP 58 Ipanema and Palarran couple of times with you. Here are the numbers ;

-ıpanema 23,5 tons, 169 sqm of sail SA/D: 7,2
-L 620 32 tons, 230 sqm of sails SA/D: 7,2
-Marquises (Palarran) 16,5 tons, 180 sqm SA/D: 10,9

Another important factor is the hull beam to hull length ratio which is never given but I can tell easily that the Marquises is by far the sleeker.
As a result Marquises will be much faster than these two boats in beating and reaching, no doubt.
Under ARC conditions the equation is different, high windage of condo cats actually help with the Dead down wind, there is a current of 1-2 nm behind and larger hulls get pushed better with the waves and currents and above all the type and the ability to use down wind sails is a major factor. (parasailor, symetrical, assymetrical, etc)

Yes I did easily with Catana 14 kts of speed (and could have done a bit more) but the wind was around 30 kts and from 90-100 degrees. When the wind goes beyond 140-150 unless you use a spi, the speed goes down drammatically. I've sailed Outremer 51 at 25 kts with huge furling genneaker hitting 12,5-13 kts max. Catana 47 under same conditions would probably make 11-12 kts.

Cheers

Yeloya

[Polux]

Originally Posted by yeloya

Hi David,

I haven't sailed the L 62 but sailed FP 58 Ipanema and Palarran couple of times with you. Here are the numbers ;

-ıpanema 23,5 tons, 169 sqm of sail SA/D: 7,2
-L 620 32 tons, 230 sqm of sails SA/D: 7,2
-Marquises (Palarran) 16,5 tons, 180 sqm SA/D: 10,9

....

I don't know how you are doing those counts regarding the SA/D in what concerns Lagoon 620 but the correct number for SA/D is 23.2, a very respectable number that put the Lagoon 62 among fast cruising sail boats.

........... Sail Area in sq. ft.
SA/D = -------------------------------------
..........(Displacement in pouds / 64)^0.6666

[Polux]

But what counts here is the downwind sail area with Spinnaker and the SA/D regarding that.

The Outremer 5x has a SA/D downwind of 64.7 and the Lagoon 62 a SA/D of 44.1.

The increase of speed is not proportional to the increase in sail area and even if the Lagoon 62 has a worse fineness ratio of the hull the numbers seem consistent with a diference of time of over two days on a transat.

52 hours is a huge diference, comparable for instance with the diference that separated the 70ft VOR trifork and the 60ft Outremer 5x (69 hours), giving the relative diferences in rating among the boats.

VOR 70 - 1.688
Outremer 5X - 1.262
Lagoon 620 - 1.197

The Outremer 5X made a passage with about the same time as the 40ft Pogo S2 and we can see that is normal, since the ratings are similar. Pogo S2 - 1.252

[yeloya]

Originally Posted by Polux

I don't know how you are doing those counts regarding the SA/D in what concerns Lagoon 620 but the correct number for SA/D is 23.2, a very respectable number that put the Lagoon 62 among fast cruising sail boats.

........... Sail Area in sq. ft.
SA/D = -------------------------------------
..........(Displacement in pouds / 64)^0.6666

I am afraid you are wrong again Polux..

I've just taken simple measurement to give a understandable ratio, not a scientific one.
The formula that you tried to give is also wrong. According to Multihull Dynamics web the formula is:

SAD= SA (in sq ft) / (2240/64*displacement in pounds)

In any case, this is also not accurate because it doesn't take into account the hull length and more importantly hull beam to hull length ratio which is the most important factor on multis.
If you like we can talk about Bruce numbers, Texel rating, the S number, etc. But this doesn't change the fact that İpanema and L62 are about the same and slow boats and Marquises is significantly faster than this two. If you still believe that L62 is "fast cruising" boat as someone who has never sailed a catamaran, let it be so..
I would agree however that L62 is great boat for partying in the fly bridge on anchor or while motoring on flat seas.

Cheers

Yeloya

[yeloya]

Originally Posted by Polux

But what counts here is the downwind sail area with Spinnaker and the SA/D regarding that.

The Outremer 5x has a SA/D downwind of 64.7 and the Lagoon 62 a SA/D of 44.1.

The increase of speed is not proportional to the increase in sail area and even if the Lagoon 62 has a worse fineness ratio of the hull the numbers seem consistent with a diference of time of over two days on a transat.

52 hours is a huge diference, comparable for instance with the diference that separated the 70ft VOR trifork and the 60ft Outremer 5x (69 hours), giving the relative diferences in rating among the boats.

VOR 70 - 1.688
Outremer 5X - 1.262
Lagoon 620 - 1.197

The Outremer 5X made a passage with about the same time as the 40ft Pogo S2 and we can see that is normal, since the ratings are similar. Pogo S2 - 1.252

Polux, this is the last time I am correcting you, promised won't do again..

İn the ARC for the monos (in racing division) are using IRC rating. This is a well established system but it cannot be in this kind of route as ARC is predominantly downwind while in IRC ratings are taking into account the sailing ability of the boat to various wind directions, not only running. As a matter of fact during the race, if the wind shifts more than certain degree, the race is abondonned.(because the boats that have more upwind capability are either penalised or over incentivated..)
For multis ARC is using what they call TCF (time correcting factor) that I don't how it's made. In any case TCF and IRC ratings are not the same thing and you cannot compare the TCF factor of a multi with a IRC rating of a mono. That means Pogo' or VOR's IRC ratings have nothing to do with X5 or L62's TCF number.
If you wonder the performance of fast cats against fast monos, the skipper of Zenyatta (GB 62) had told me that in Heineken regatta they left behind the VOR 60 with a nice margin. Remember that this around the island race,hence you sail to every wind directions. It's therefore much more relevant than ARC results.

Cheers

Yeloya

[Polux]

Originally Posted by yeloya

Polux, this is the last time I am correcting you, promised won't do again..

İn the ARC for the monos (in racing division) are using IRC rating. This is a well established system but it cannot be in this kind of route as ARC is predominantly downwind while in IRC ratings are taking into account the sailing ability of the boat to various wind directions, not only running. As a matter of fact during the race, if the wind shifts more than certain degree, the race is abondonned.(because the boats that have more upwind capability are either penalised or over incentivated..)
For multis ARC is using what they call TCF (time correcting factor) that I don't how it's made. In any case TCF and IRC ratings are not the same thing and you cannot compare the TCF factor of a multi with a IRC rating of a mono. That means Pogo' or VOR's IRC ratings have nothing to do with X5 or L62's TCF number.
If you wonder the performance of fast cats against fast monos, the skipper of Zenyatta (GB 62) had told me that in Heineken regatta they left behind the VOR 60 with a nice margin. Remember that this around the island race,hence you sail to every wind directions. It's therefore much more relevant than ARC results.

Cheers

Yeloya

You can correct me at will. I never said that it was the same rating. IRC is a serious one TCF is an approximated rating based on IRC. For comparative purposes and regarding what I was talking about it is enough and the prof is that well sailed sailboat (raced) with IRC and TCF, like it was the case with the two class 40ft boats (1.252 and 1.231) and the 60f Outremer 5 X (1.262), with very close ratings, have arriving not far, while the 60ft Wally 60 (1.319), faster and with a bigger ratting than the one of the Outremer 5x (1.262), arriving 13 hours earlier.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by yeloya

I am afraid you are wrong again Polux..

I've just taken simple measurement to give a understandable ratio, not a scientific one.
The formula that you tried to give is also wrong. According to Multihull Dynamics web the formula is:

SAD= SA (in sq ft) / (2240/64*displacement in pounds)

... If you still believe that L62 is "fast cruising" boat as someone who has never sailed a catamaran, let it be so..
I would agree however that L62 is great boat for partying in the fly bridge on anchor or while motoring on flat seas.

Cheers

Yeloya

You can correct me but try to do so with good information not posting misinformation. I did not want to be impolite but what you posted as Displacement/Length, those numbers, mean nothing and are not recognized by anybody as a measure of D/L.

Regarding Multihulls, the D/L formula is this one:

"A Catamaran’s Power to Weight Ratio or Sail Area Displacement Ratio

[B]SA/D = SA / (Disp / 64)^2/3/B]

This ratio is an indicator of how much sail area a catamaran has relative to its displacement. "
https://www.aeroyacht.com/catamaran-...an-efficiency/

And guess what: this SA/D = SA/ (Disp/64) ^2/3 is exactly the same that I had posted, this:

........... Sail Area in sq. ft.
SA/D = -------------------------------------
..........(Displacement in pouds / 64)^0.6666

Regarding Lagoon cats, it seems that the prejudice exists not only on monohull sailors. Again and again lagoons have been proving that they are fast passagemakers on the ARC, particularly the 620 and not only this year. Lagoons and other condo cats have also being showing that the diference in passage time, regarding loaded boats on a transat, is not big regarding a condo cat and a performance cat, both boats ocasionally using the engine, as any cruiser will do, on a cruising transat.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Polux

Passage times and number of engine hours. At black, no engine hours (meaning the boat was racing), at Green from more than 0 to 10, at Blue, 10 to 20, at Brown from 20 to 30, at Violet from 30 to 40, at Dark red from 40 to 60, at Red, more than 60.

8th group,
http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...ml#post2274842
the one that seems to interest most here, boats with 45ft and under. We have seen that many, most of them performance cruisers, had already entered with previous groups.

There are some boats that had already arrived on the previous group that are not performance cruisers. Among monohulls that percentage is bigger in what regards cats, meaning that it seems to exist a bigger average difference on passage times between monohull performance cruisers and main market monohull cruisers then in what regards the diference between performance cats and condo cats.

From this group several boats went faster and arrived on the previous group, namely the Dufour 44p and the X43 (two performance cruisers), so excluding those two, the first boat to arrive on this group was a Lagoon 450 (78) and the Allures 45 (84), that entered about 2 hours from the last of the previous group, the X 43. They made the passage in about 20 days 2 hours.

Next, at about 1 hour come a Bavaria 40 (94), at about more 3 hours, a XC 45 (21), about 3 hours later and close, a Lagoon 42(37) and a Moody 45DS (102). Next arrived a Jeanneau SO 45.2 (120) that made the Passage in 20 days 14 hours.

On this group all boats motored a lot (3 days or more) with the exception of the Lagoon 42 and the XC 45.

[Bleemus]

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Polux

Passage times and number of engine hours. At black, no engine hours (meaning the boat was racing), at Green from more than 0 to 10, at Blue, 10 to 20, at Brown from 20 to 30, at Violet from 30 to 40, at Dark red from 40 to 60, at Red, more than 60.

The group of boats with 40ft or less. Some boats with 40ft or less, have already finished the passage long ago, with special relevance for a Dufour 385 that had arrived several days ahead of any of these boats.

Group 9 (40ft or less):
http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...ml#post2275624

The first boat to arrive on this group has the Halberg Rassy 40 (102), that made the passage in 20 days and 22 hours. Followed at 1 hour and 1/2 by the Maxi 1300 (25) from the previous group, 1 hour and 1/2 after entered the 2th First 40 and 1 hour after the Fountain Pajot Lucia 40 (30).

7 hours after arrived the smaller Italia 10. 98 (37ft) (51), 8 hours after arrived the even smaller A35 (16) (that had spent almost 24 hours in Cabo Verde) and finally the last of this group, at 4 hours, a Lagoon 380 S2 (54) that made the passage in 21 days and 22 hours.

As usual, these boats were relatively well sailed and arrived on the middle of considerable bigger boats, for instance the A35 (that stopped in Cabo Verde) arrived ahead of a Discovery 55 that made it directly.

From these boats only one motored for more than 3 days (the HR 40). From the others only one cat and a monohull motored more than 2 days.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Polux

Passage times and number of engine hours. At black, no engine hours (meaning the boat was racing), at Green from more than 0 to 10, at Blue, 10 to 20, at Brown from 20 to 30, at Violet from 30 to 40, at Dark red from 40 to 60, at Red, more than 60.

The passage time of the smaller boats the ones with 37ft of less. As in other groups, several of this size group had already arrived but most, really small boats have arrived on this group, just few hours ago.

10th Group
http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...ml#post2277019

The first to arrive from this group was the Halberg Rassy 372 (39), that took more 6 hours and a half that the last of the previous group, a Lagoon 38. It made the passage in about 22 days and 7 hours. Next, at 9 hours, arrived the Elan 37 with an all female crew, then, at 10 hours the first 32ft boat, a Najad 320 (42), then at 6 hours a Comfortina 32 (36) followed by another Comfortina 32 (24), at 18 hours. This one took 23 days and 23 hours to make the crossing.

And that is all in what regards passage times. 24 boats will arrive after the Comfortina 32, some few sailed later others have stopped at Cabo Verde for refueling, some were just slower, including much bigger boats.

Not surprisingly, due to the smaller tankage, all of this boats motored less than two days, with an average of a bit more than a day motoring, or a bit less than a day and a half, if we exclude the Elan 370 that was on the racing division and didn't use the engine.

[Polux]

I have said that I had observed in other years that many of the boats that made the faster passages were not, in many cases the ones that made more engine hours, but the best sailed, even if we could also find among those some not badly sailed but with a big number of hours, as it was the case with a Lagoon 450, a Hylas 54 a Discovery 55, three Lagoons (450 and two 620) and a Bowman 57.

Those are much more the exception than the rule. We can see that in what regards the passage time of the boats that are raced but also in what regards the passage time of many boats on the cruising division.

We can see also that many boats that arrive on the tail have a big number of hours and that, in what regards bigger boats (that have the tankage), is much more more frequent then boats with many hours among the ones that make fast passage times.

We can see that the boat that entered immediately before the Najad 320, with 42 engine hours was a Leopard 48 with 102 engine hours and immediately after a Lagoon 440 with 120.

After the last boat considered on the 10th group, a Comfortina 32 with 24 engine hours, entered a Westerly Sealord 39 with 98, an Oceanis 46 with 108 an Oceanis 343 with 149, an Oceanis 473 with 162 and a Reliant 49 with 77.

I wonder were those guys on the Oceanis 343 found space to carry diesel for motoring more than 6 days, taking into consideration that this was not one of the boats that stopped in Cabo Verde.

[Bleemus]

To be honest all of this means nothing. We have no idea what boats were pushed hard, which boats were more concerned with fishing and great meals, or if anyone on board knew how to trim sails properly. Useless stats to be honest.