ARC 2015

[Polux]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

Hmmm. Yes but two rudders are more vulnerable than one. No? They are off center and as such they are not protected (if partially) by the keel.

I like two rudders, but I also like them to be kickups even if kickups create their own set of challenges.
b

They are not really more vulnerable but less, not at least where they are more used, on beamy boats with a big transom. But this time let's change: see if you can tell me why I am saying this. Not valid only for you. Anybody can have a go at it. Why?

The real big problem is the bigger difficulty regarding maneuvering on a marina. The turning circle is bigger.

[Polux]

Ok, no one wants to risk an answer so I will explain what I mean. First of all it is only half true. That is not relevant when sailing downwind when in fact the two rudders will be less protected than a single one, even if only partially since a two rudder system has much less deeper blades.

Being less deep makes them not only more capable of evading deeper floating debris, as make them much less prone to hit the bottom when going backwards med mooring. It makes also them more resistant, since the lever effect is much smaller. Today when performance cruisers of 40ft or bigger have a single rudder, on the swallow version (with 2.0 or 2.3m), the single rudder is almost as deep as the keel and that makes the rudder more vulnerable.

But it was not about any of this that I was thinking about but on the asymmetrical hull foot print of the type of beamy boats with big transoms were twin rudders are more effective. Those boats sail sideways (except downwind). That makes the keel more on the axis of one of the twin rudders than it would be regarding a single rudder. That is the main reason that makes twin rudders more effective on these type of boats.

So in this case, a twin rudder is more protected than a central one since the other is almost out of water...well, not completely anyway but less prone to hit debris.

An old drawing by Finot, one of the fathers of this type of hulls, shows that:


Regarding kick off rudders they are completely unsuited for the med were most sailboats, particularly new ones, sail so that is out of question as a characteristic regarding production boats, at least European ones.

A great idea but one that would make them extremely vulnerable while med mooring on a quay and that would be way more frequent then hitting debris.

[Polux]

Let's have a look at the smaller ARC+ that is not far from the finish: The first thing we can notice is that the Shipman 62, the fastest boat on the first leg and on the bigger part of this one, has problems. Don't know exactly what and I hope that the problem is only blown away spinnakers.

They are with a better wind angle and even so slower than the X 612 and the leading pack, making almost less 1k.

On the lead the X612, a 20 year old design, is being chased by a Swan 651 and Fountain Pajot 67, a bigger boat and a brand new design. In fact the Pajot 67 is a faster boat, specially downwind and should be leading if it was so well sailed as the X612. The IRC rating of the X612 is 1.152 and the one of the FP67 is 1.182.

The Swan 651 is a 33 year's old design and has a IRC rating of 1203, curiously higher than the one of the FP67 but the FP 67 has used the engine on the 1st leg for considerable time. We would only be able about that regarding this leg when the results come out.

Behind This trio comes the smaller Catana 472 that has a IRC very similar to the leading boat (1.150), then comes the one that has been the fastest boat, the Shipman 62 (IRC 1.228) and the Catana 582 (1.249) that has a IRC bigger to the one of the Shipman .

Not far a surprisingly fast Oyster 575 (IRC 1.103) and at some distance another duo, a Halberg Rassy 54 (1.021 )and a Southerly 49 (0.999).

Then another duo, a Lagoon 380 (0.981) and a Oyster 545 (1.065).

Then a 25 year old Baltic 52 (1.062) followed at some distance by a Jeanneau 54DS (1.067) and a Leopard 44 (1.031).

At some distance another duo, a Beneteau Oceanis 54 (1.154) and a Fountain Pajot 67 (1.182).

Looking at really small boats with 36ft or less we can notice the very good performance of an Halberg Rassy 352 a Albin 36, a Laurin 32 and a Gib Sea 35 that are doing better than much bigger boats, including several cats.

Really really slow, much behind all others, a Dudley Dix 38 and even further away a Hunter passage 42...that is not making a great passage.

The Dudley 38 was the slower boat on the first leg (so nothing new) but the Hunter even if among the slower was not the slowest, being considerably faster than the Dudley, so, I don't know if they have problems or if they have just a small crew and are tired (maybe problems with the autopilot?).

Anybody knows if they have problems?

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by Polux

They are not really more vulnerable but less, not at least where they are more used, on beamy boats with a big transom. But this time let's change: see if you can tell me why I am saying this. Not valid only for you. Anybody can have a go at it. Why?

The real big problem is the bigger difficulty regarding maneuvering on a marina. The turning circle is bigger.

I do not care about med mooring and marinas. I am not a marina senator, I am a sailor. If I were to buy a boat that is perfect for a marina ... I would buy a waterfront condo!

Sailing, they are shorter, so any further-under-surface object is less likely to hit them. Another factor is they are smaller and so the forces are smaller and so in some scenarios they will be less stressed.

Still, I see twins as more vulnerable. Most damage sailing is from floating objects. Any object deflected by the keel ends up on one of the rudders.

More vulnerable IMHO.

Not so long ago a MiniTransat boat hit something with one of the twins. The rudder was built too strong (or its attachment was too strong) and it ripped off the transom. The boat flooded and the skipper was forced to abandon.

That's why I say have twins, but build them kick-up.

b.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by arsenelupiga

sorry, i guess i wasnt clear where i am coming from.

in user forum someone with lots of experience with monos and cats claimed that. i did not believe, and still do not believe that.

what i meant is that in this particular rally, his statement could be true. I normally do not follow any rallies/races, so this could be 1 in a 100 conditions for cats.
..

Ok, fair enough even if it is quite the opposite regarding that statement to be true, I mean in a general way, as any general statement has to be taken.

That kind of misconception is wildly spread mainly among cat owners.

The truth is that cats are not all the same in what regards performance, neither monohulls and you have to compare boat by boat and not generalize about cats and monohulls.

As you can see the rating on the ARC is quite accurate regarding boat's potential performance and the ratings you can find there are a very good tool to compare potential performance of cruising cats versus cruising monohulls and I say this because if it is easy to find ratings regarding monohulls but it is dificult to find them regarding cats.

Off course the crew is a fundamental part in the equation regarding a boat being sailed near their potential (or not) and you can see that among the leading boats many are being sailed not far from their potential.

Also among the sailors that are sailing on a more cruising mode it is interesting to try to understand what type of boats are easier to sail closer to their potential or more difficult. For instance, boats like the Pogo have a huge rating and are very fast but they need a very good sailor to bring them near their potential.

You can see that the two Pogos 12.50 on the ARC, while being relatively fast for 40ft, are being out-sailed by many boats with a smaller sailing potential. Now don't generalize that regarding monohulls and multihulls because that it is not true

I would say that the same happens between a performance cat and a condo cat and that's why you see so many condo cats having a performance not far from the ones of performance cats on the ARC.

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by Polux

Really really slow, much behind all others, a Dudley Dix 38 and even further away a Hunter passage 42...that is not making a great passage.

The Dudley 38 was the slower boat on the first leg (so nothing new) but the Hunter even if among the slower was not the slowest, being considerably faster than the Dudley, so, I don't know if they have problems or if they have just a small crew and are tired (maybe problems with the autopilot?).

Anybody knows if they have problems?

Yes.

The Hunter was in the marina for an extra day or two. I think they had some repairs (they have a blog). And the Dix I remember seeing them return but then go on. You can spot the extra 'loop' they made on their trackline, maybe one day out of Mindelho. Likely some tech issue that they were able to sort out while going upwind for a time.

There is a Westerly there at the end of the pack sailing very slow all the time. I think it is some sailing school or something.

The pack has very good conditions. Corona Aq never less than 6 knots and going nearly direct for the landfall. Faster than some 40 ft cats.

b.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

I do not care about med mooring and marinas. I am not a marina senator, I am a sailor. If I were to buy a boat that is perfect for a marina ... I would buy a waterfront condo!
....
That's why I say have twins, but build them kick-up.
b.

I guess you did not understood what I mean: Production boats are made following the needs of the biggest possible number of users and that excludes kick-up rudders.

Meed mooring is not only utilized on marinas but on all med town and small village quays.

If you want kick-up rudders you will have to look for (some) race boats or have an one off and a one off is much more expensive than a similar production boat.

[Polux]

Regarding the ARC the more interesting thing now is the different courses the better sailors are taking to avoid that big hole with weak winds.

I have learned a lot following many transats, looking at the wind and to the different routes and courses followed by some of the best navigators. The ARC is normally not very interesting regarding that: Some go North and catch higher winds, some go by the traditional course and make a less fast but more comfortable passage.

This is the first time the ARC is really interesting: The guys that are going now really to North would have to come really South at a given point otherwise they will have no wind. The ones that chose the South course will have less wind, some weak wind but medium winds will appear first. It also depends on the boat position. Better for the faster boats that are ahead, worse for slower boats that are way behind.

On the middle courses it is like a big puzzle and to go fast they have to have always updated information, to be lucky and to change courses plenty of time. That should be quite tiresome.

If you are new to this game, I mean following the routing options of others, look at the previsions, understand what they are trying to do and see the results, don't miss it because it will be fun and instructive.

Off course, on a professional racing transat I assume that they know what they are doing, even if sometimes does not work out. Here it may even happen that I know more than some of those guys.

Fun anyway. Feel free to comment on all the different strategies and different routing options: the big game is about to begun and it will be on for some days.

Unsupported Browser

https://www.windyty.com/?2015-11-28-03,22.157,-37.288,6

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by Polux

I guess you did not understood what I mean: Production boats are made following the needs of the biggest possible number of users and that excludes kick-up rudders.

Meed mooring is not only utilized on marinas but on all med town and small village quays.

If you want kick-up rudders you will have to look for (some) race boats or have an one off and a one off is much more expensive than a similar production boat.

I am 100% with you.

I am most unhappy with where the Western style consumptionism is taking boat design. The for-marina-use-med-style-thinking is killing it for the sailing minority: boats are built to standards having nothing to do with seafaring and seaworthiness, harbour fees are skyrocketing and a visiting sailor stopped being a welcome weirdo and started being a welcome credit card.

Re maneuvering in tight spaces I have seen at least one design where twin engines drove two angled shafts. All this accompanied by two rudders. This one seemed to outdo other boats when docking.

And so we are torn between what can be sold with a good margin and what is good. No free lunches, cruising or racing.

b.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

I am 100% with you.

I am most unhappy with where the Western style consumptionism is taking boat design. The for-marina-use-med-style-thinking is killing it for the sailing minority: boats are built to standards having nothing to do with seafaring and seaworthiness, harbour fees are skyrocketing and a visiting sailor stopped being a welcome weirdo and started being a welcome credit card.
....
And so we are torn between what can be sold with a good margin and what is good. No free lunches, cruising or racing.
b.

That makes not any sense. You can find all types of boats on the market unless you really have very strange tastes, so strange that it is not worth to produce anything for that type of sailors since they did not exist as a market, even a small one. For instance there are some sailors that want a carbon full keeler cruiser. Do you think you can find a market for that? Or many sailors that want such a boat?

The kick up rudders not integrating any production design (that I know off) as nothing to do with that but with the fact most boats are designed with characteristics that does not exclude the med (for obvious reasons) and the need or will of most sailors that sail there to go from time to time to a city quay or marina without a fair possibility of damaging the rudders. That regards all types of cruisers.

Regarding boats being designed taking as probable main design criteria the interior that regards only the main market (cats or monohulls) and even so there are some pretty good boats made that way. Performance cruisers or voyage boats are not designed with the same criteria and the interior space is not the main focus in what regards design.

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by Polux

a) That makes not any sense. You can find all types of boats on the market unless you really have very strange tastes, so strange that it is not worth to produce anything for that type of sailors since they did not exist as a market, even a small one.For instance there are some sailors that want a carbon full keeler cruiser. Do you think you can find a market for that? Or many sailors that want such a boat?

(...)

b) The kick up rudders not integrating any production design (...)

(...)

c) Regarding boats being designed taking as probable main design criteria the interior that regards only the main market (cats or monohulls) and even so there are some pretty good boats made that way.

a) Sometimes the sense is temporarily hidden from our view. One guy had long time ago said "eureka!". Please note before that he had been seen walking circles mumbling 'that makes not any sense'. Eureka moment: if one wants a carbon full keel boat, it is relatively easy to buy carbon and resin and rent a full keel mold. You could also consider the scenario where it is not only the demand driving the supply but also the supply creating its own demand. Both points of view are found equally valid in economics, even if the 'opposite' schools tend to bash each other on their stubborn heads.

b) Dragonfly 25, Gulfstream 35, McGregor 26, etc.

c) "...Regarding boats being designed taking as probable main design criteria the interior ...". What could be possibly wrong with designing boats so that the main criteria is how they sail AND incorporating nice and sea-going interiors into the seaworthy hull? Would it be so difficult to do? No. But it would bring less return to the shareholders (of boat factories).

If you ask a land engineer to build a bridge so that the main criterion is that planes can crash against it, you will receive a dumb look. When you ask a "naval architect" to build a BOAT so that her interior sells to rich man's wife, you will get a cruising "boat", pink leather sofas included (but not screwed down to the floors).

;-) What does it all have to do with the ARC ??? ;-) Arghh, yes, the Pogo lost one rudder because twin rudders are more prone to getting damaged in the seaway .... ;-)

+Big bunch of flowers,

PS Seen a 'new' Outremer (45?). Looks, errr... short! (=stubby, of sorts) Very nice finish and plenty of good solutions throughout.

Now I am off to the trackers. (the ARC, but also the two attempts at JVT)

Cheers,
b.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

.....
c) "...Regarding boats being designed taking as probable main design criteria the interior ...". What could be possibly wrong with designing boats so that the main criteria is how they sail AND incorporating nice and sea-going interiors into the seaworthy hull? Would it be so difficult to do? No. But it would bring less return to the shareholders (of boat factories).

Hum, I don't think we are talking the same language: Being the main focus on the interior and probably in price does not mean that the NA is not designing a cruising sailboat and a cruising sailboat is made to live inside and to sail. The focus on living does not mean that the sailing side is forgotten only that in what regards compromises, the sailing is more compromised.

I am talking about bigger freeboards, less narrow entries, higher cabins and in what regards rigging, simple and less expensive rigging, less possibilities in what regards sail shape control but also easier to sail and more hassle free (auto-tacking jib and furling main).

That does not prevent today's mass market main cruisers to sail better than 30 or 40 years old main market cruisers, that had a much worse living space.

If you want a boat that is designed to sail first and to cruise too, that is easy and more expensive: Have a performance monohull or multihull.

For example have this beauty and invite me for a ride You may not believe but it has a very good cruising interior.

Italian brand, off course, designed by Mark Mills, that after many great race boats is finally designing big yachts.

Originally Posted by barnakiel

;-) What does it all have to do with the ARC ??? ;-) Arghh, yes, the Pogo lost one rudder because twin rudders are more prone to getting damaged in the seaway .... ;-)
Cheersb.

I guess that 1/4 of the boats on the ARC have twin rudders and that is not counting with cats

you can see it another way: the only reason Pogo is still sailing fast is because it has two rudders. Boats have broke rudders on past ARC and they had only one.

Cheers.

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by Polux

(...)

That does not prevent today's mass market main cruisers to sail better than 30 or 40 years old main market cruisers, that had a much worse living space.

(...)

you can see it another way: the only reason Pogo is still sailing fast is because it has two rudders. Boats have broke rudders on past ARC and they had only one.

Cheers.

I do not feel old main market cruisers had worse living space than their modern equivalents.

It is right to say they had LESS space than modern boats, but less does not equal worse, unless we go for quantity over quality. Quantity over quality is indeed the modern way in many respects: manufacturing, living and interpersonal relations. And where this popular attitude takes us tomorrow, we are yet to see.

I prefer to think that the internal space of a boat should be arranged around the purpose of a boat, and the purpose of a boat is sailing (not living inside, that's what houses are for). Sitting in a roomy salon of a modern cruiser you may actually forget you are on a boat. Then why be on a boat?

I am not sure we speak different languages though. I think we are simply chasing different rabbits. I believe as long as we are having fun doing so, live is worth living.

I wholly agree on single rudders: you lose one and that's that. Two rudders better.

G'd nite,
b.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

I do not feel old main market cruisers had worse living space than their modern equivalents.

It is right to say they had LESS space than modern boats, but less does not equal worse, unless we go for quantity over quality. Quantity over quality is indeed the modern way in many respects: manufacturing, living and interpersonal relations. And where this popular attitude takes us tomorrow, we are yet to see.

I prefer to think that the internal space of a boat should be arranged around the purpose of a boat, and the purpose of a boat is sailing (not living inside, that's what houses are for). Sitting in a roomy salon of a modern cruiser you may actually forget you are on a boat. Then why be on a boat?

I am not sure we speak different languages though. I think we are simply chasing different rabbits. I believe as long as we are having fun doing so, live is worth living.

I wholly agree on single rudders: you lose one and that's that. Two rudders better.

G'd nite,
b.

The difference is that I am not chasing any rabbit while you are chasing one. Maybe it has do do with what I have done in my life: I have designed mostly personalized living spaces for others and several times the clients were so satisfied with the answer that I had given to their needs and wishes that they truly believed that I had designed my dream house and not theirs.

Bottom point: I don't look at boats, or judge cruising sailboats according my personal desires and needs but according to the desires and needs they were designed to satisfy (and that represent a market niche). Those can be very different from mines. I look at design under a quality point of view, a kind of professional look if you want, and not according if they are fit for me or not, even that some few fit my criteria, that I know, is far from being a majority one.

Regarding space and quality, one thing has nothing to do with other, but space, in any living space is always a valuable commodity, specially on a boat that have by nature an expensive and very limited space.

Regarding quality, most that don't look at it with a professional look, tend to mixture quality with their own taste regarding style. Quality has to do with the choice of materials, finish and quality of design that it is independent of style, that can be one that you don't desire at all regarding what you would chose to live in.

Regarding cruising sailboats, not to be living spaces that have many things in common with living spaces in houses and assuming that those spaces are designed (and should be designed) to be used exclusively on a sailing perspective (while the boat is sailing) you are wrong, at least in what regards the needs of the huge majority of cruisers.

And wrong because production sailboats are designed for a market and markets are defined by a group of sailors that have similar needs and tastes and regarding main market the ones that use the interior of the boat for living comfortably on a marina or at anchor is hugely superior to the ones that use it while sailing. Huge does not express correctly that difference. The number that use more those interiors while sailing is ridiculous low to the point of almost statistically non relevant.

Even the ones that cross Oceans to cruise on another cruising ground (that are already a tiny majority) use that interior with the functionality of being a sailboat interior (as you define it) for about a month in the year and if they live on the boat, use it as a "normal" living space 11 months a year.

Since a comfortable interior for sailing is not a comfortable interior for living on anchor, a sailboat's interiors reflects the needed compromises regarding to be designed more for living on it while sailing or for living on it while at anchor or at the marina.

Note that most that cruise on the cruising grounds, even on day passages, don't really use the interior as one made to live inside on passage. Most of the time is passed on the cockpit, the lunch is many times an improvised one made of snacks and the dinner a good one made when the boat is already at anchor. That explains also the growing importance of the living space on the cockpit.

If you want a sailboat designed essentially to sail the best it can with an interior designed to live aboard while sailing, have a ocean solo racer. Some of them have a cruising version that will suit perfectly what you defines as your needs. Those are not the needs of the vast majority of cruisers and I am not talking only about the ones that buy main market boats (monohulls or cats).

There is also a substantial difference (I think) between your way of looking at boats and mine: You will call a good sailboat to the one that will fulfill your sailing and living criteria, even if they are very minority, and look at other sailboats that don't fit your needs, but fit the needs of many more, as not to being properly designed, assuming that your needs and desires are the "right" ones in what regards what should be a proper cruising sailboat.

And by the "right" ones I talk about tending to find that the way you wish to cruise and the sailboats you find more fit for it have some kind of superiority over the others, that are happier cruising in different ways and with sailboats more adapted for those ways.

There are many cruising styles and many different cruising sailboats that are designed to answer all those different needs and cruising styles. I don't assume that one cruising style is better than another. We don't cruise for a living but for pleasure and what gives pleasure to ones can be very boring or tiresome to others and the same happens to different cruising sailing boats.

A final point: Sailing boats use sail for cruising even if many use more the engine than sails, but many use motor boats for cruising. Cruising and cruising boats have not directly to do with sailing. Many sail in non cruising sailboats.

Some cruisers use sails as a way to move the boat around less expensively and are not properly interested in sailing, others are interested in sailing and cruising and these are not necessarily the majority (and I don't think they are) and that reflects also on the type and compromises on the sailing boat regarding sailing performance, motoring performance and interior space.

A boat being more adapted to the cruising needs of a given cruiser does not make it a less good boat but a better boat for that cruiser.

Bottom point: I don't mean to be offensive towards you, just to give you something to thought about regarding what is the perfect cruising sailboat and the interior they should have

[Factor]

I think this thread should be renamed, Polux is always right. Make it easier to know what it really is about