Ketchs vs Sloops

[CarlF]

Dockhead and Dockhead

I don't find that the in-mast furling impacts pointing. It hurts the upwind speed. The lack of battens and roach de-powers the upper half of the main such that all that extra mast height isn't helping speed.

I was on a big Oyster last summer with vertical battens and fancy laminate sails. The upper part of that sail was doing nothing upwind - but it didn't matter because there rest of the rig had the boat going close to hull speed. The same speed could have been accomplished with a smaller main that had roach and horizontal full length battens (like on a ketch )

As Bash notes, it's the genoa that pinches first on a typical cruising boat because of furler sag and shrouds mounted outboard. A well rigged cruising boat (ketch or sloop) should be able to sail at about 35 degrees to the apparent wind in good conditions without undue pinching. To point higher you usually need a racing boat rig and a foredeck crew for sail changes.

Carl

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by daddle

I see the resistance to change continues...all useful technology becomes obsolete. Ketches, schooners, brigantines...now spinnakers too. Soon enough sloops. It over, done, stick a fork in it. Far better technologies exist.

Your logic defies laws of nature and you either don't know that or you do and hope I don't and I have this feeling you know well enough, so I'll spell it out for others reading this thread:
On a run you have the wind behind you. To create an apparent wind coming from forward you will have to go faster than the wind. This is indeed possible for fast boats (Dashew ketches do it too), but never on a run. On a run your sails are stalled and all you can hope for is to approach the same speed as the wind, which you never do because of drag through the water.

I've been on Skip's Beowolf. Did not sail, unfortunately. I'd hesitate to call her a ketch...or at least draw many parallels. Seems he likes the sloop rig so much he installed two :-)

Well, if anything is silly in this thread it's to call Beowulf anything different than a ketch. I am not going into that argument. But who is Skip?

I don't seek your agreement. I just thought the thread could benefit from a contrary point-of-view.

No problem, I don't mind at all when others don't agree with me because I would quickly loose interest in the forum if everyone agrees all the time. But you will have to yield to laws of nature or it doesn't make sense anymore.

Also, you still didn't answer my earlier questions, you're only adding more stuff like schooners and brigantines... which aren't the subject.

cheers,
Nick.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by CarlF

Dockhead and Dockhead

I don't find that the in-mast furling impacts pointing. It hurts the upwind speed. The lack of battens and roach de-powers the upper half of the main such that all that extra mast height isn't helping speed.

I was on a big Oyster last summer with vertical battens and fancy laminate sails. The upper part of that sail was doing nothing upwind - but it didn't matter because there rest of the rig had the boat going close to hull speed. The same speed could have been accomplished with a smaller main that had roach and horizontal full length battens (like on a ketch )

As Bash notes, it's the genoa that pinches first on a typical cruising boat because of furler sag and shrouds mounted outboard. A well rigged cruising boat (ketch or sloop) should be able to sail at about 35 degrees to the apparent wind in good conditions without undue pinching. To point higher you usually need a racing boat rig and a foredeck crew for sail changes.

Carl

Thanks for the information. I spent about 4 days on the helm of a Swan 90 last year, a sloop with nearly new laminate sails (I cannot imagine the cost), fully battened main, full suite of hydraulic controls, and several much better sailors than I constantly working the sail trim. We were beating into a 20 knot wind the entire trip trying to make progress directly upwind. This was in the Sea of Cortez. We never sailed closer than 40 degrees to the apparent wind, for very long. That was my assigned job, to try to keep the average angle to the apparent wind at 40 degrees or even 42 degrees. I was very happy with the occasional burst of 38 degrees without pinching and VMG would fall off radically after that anyway so there was no point, despite the fancy sails and intense fiddling.

This boat, while faster of course (equally on all points of sail), did not seem to be much if any more weatherly than my vastly more modest vessel, with her furling main and 9-year old Dacron sails.

If what you say is true, then that is good news and kind of explains the popularity of furling mains. You can make up for a lot of speed with tacking angle (the aggregate of which you read with VMG to windward as Nick said). And if you're getting hull speed anyway then you also don't care.

[CarlF]

"ARCs have been won with it" ?? As you note, it's a downwind trip! The mainsail's not doing much of anything. The biggest problem is excess rolling from those huge spinnakers making everyone seasick and spilling the wine. I'd much prefer a mizzen staysail.

The two boats you mention have long waterlines that should be able to 200 miles a day downwind flying trash bags from their masts.

I agree that in a sloop over 50' mainsail furling has real advantages for a small crew. I prefer in-boom but either kind makes it easy to reduce sail upwind to keep the boat on it's feet and the helm balanced. Much faster that way.

Like on a ketch.

Carl

[s/v Jedi]

Hi Carl,

Originally Posted by CarlF

I don't find that the in-mast furling impacts pointing. It hurts the upwind speed.

Correct. But it light winds loosing that speed means the boat will have to fall off precious degrees to make up. In other words, the VMG is impacted as long as hull speed isn't reached.

I was on a big Oyster last summer with vertical battens and fancy laminate sails. The upper part of that sail was doing nothing upwind

Yes, and the laminate in combination with the vertical battens already compensate for many other problems that can't be overcome with regular furling mains as seen on most of the cruising boats.

The newest thing is inflatable battens. Yes, everything is being done to enable more sales of furling mains and mizzens. The stupidity of it is that with all that extra cost (and we're talking big time extra costs) it will never beat the regular main with full battens. The increase in mast diameter alone is enough to make that impossible... even if they accomplish full roach with those inflatable battens. Think of all the high pressure hose sewn into your sails....

As Bash notes, it's the genoa that pinches first on a typical cruising boat because of furler sag and shrouds mounted outboard. A well rigged cruising boat (ketch or sloop) should be able to sail at about 35 degrees to the apparent wind in good conditions without undue pinching. To point higher you usually need a racing boat rig and a foredeck crew for sail changes.

Thanks you... now they will all tell you too that sloops point higher than ketches because they conveniently forget about the words "cruising boat". But in all honesty, I will give the cruising sloop a possible better VMG in conditions at or under hull speed.

ciao!
Nick.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by CarlF

The two boats you mention have long waterlines that should be able to 200 miles a day downwind flying trash bags from their masts.

My impression, although I admit I have never done a transoceanic passage myself, is that maintaining 200 miles a day for days at a time is a h*ll of an accomplishment for any cruising boat less capable than, say Beowulf, requiring perfect sails, gear, and a very accomplished crew, and on top fo that, good luck with conditions. Maybe it's not impractical for something unusual like Nick's boat, but I think that this is out of reach for 99% of all cruising boats and certainly not doable with trash bags.

Do you often get 200 mile days consistently over days, Nick? Your boat is about the only cruising boat I can think of where one could imagine that this might be achievable without huge effort.

[CarlF]

Dockhead.

Damn - I'd love to spend four days driving a Swan 90 upwind. Surprised you couldn't do a little closer than 40 degrees but you're probably right. We all want to believe better than 40 degrees! You're just more honest than most. It would be interesting to do a survey of what cruisers actually see in apparent wind angle and VMG when going upwind. My bet is that it's pretty similar for most modern mono cruising designs (except for the obvious effect of waterline length on maximum VMG)

Sorry if the "trash bags" comment was flippant. 200 mile days are never automatic. But I'm sure Nick would agree, it's absolutely incredible what waterline length does to a day's run - especially downwind in the trades. Dashew was ahead of almost everyone understanding waterline length and easily driven hulls to get to hull speed quickly.

I fear another reason that in-mast furling is so widely accepted is that few know how to trim a mainsail for upwind power - regardless of shape or even on a ketch . The headsail's doing all the work. But if you get close to hull speed, who cares?


Carl

[s/v Jedi]

Dockhead, we can't run so we'll have to gybe downwind. In tradewind passages we should be able to do better than 250 nm but we are happy with that.

What counts here is waterline length and the guts to put up enough surface area to reach your hull speed. Our waterline is 64' and with our light displacement this puts our hull speed at 11-12 knots. For moderate to heavy displacement boats in the same conditions, a 50 foot waterline should do 225nm; a 40 foot waterline 200nm and a 30 foot waterline 175nm. If you do less you should put more sail up. It's not wise to go slow because you expose yourself to more weather, more passing waves and more wear and tear on the equipment.

I must say that I am not very much impressed with the Oyster performance. When Artemis (Sundeer 64 hull #1) won the ARC, the defeat of the Oysters was so utterly complete that the Sundeer got a handicap from that day on which will never enable them to win again. That's what you get with Oyster as the main sponsor ;-)

I wonder about the elapsed time record Artemis set... does anyone know where to find the ARC records set over the years?

And yes, it's true that in-mast furling doesn't matter at all because the sails are stalled anyway. Everything that is normally drag is now helping propulsion. It is the most stupid and most boring point of sail for cruisers... until you set that spinnaker in 25 knots!

Not all sloops have their jib luff before the main. The modern sloops with huge mains (long booms) and small jibs are very different than the ones with huge fore triangles and small booms.

cheers,
Nick.

[s/v Jedi]

Oh, Beowulf can average 300nm per day so she is well above that silly 200nm stuff ;-)

Artemis did a 320nm in 24 hours on a video I have but that was during a storm and just once.

cheers,
Nick.

[Stillraining]

This is Fun..

Nick when are you going to come teach me how to sail me boat..

[Christian Van H]

Is it time for this yet?

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

Dockhead, we can't run so we'll have to gybe downwind. In tradewind passages we should be able to do better than 250 nm but we are happy with that.

What counts here is waterline length and the guts to put up enough surface area to reach your hull speed. Our waterline is 64' and with our light displacement this puts our hull speed at 11-12 knots. For moderate to heavy displacement boats in the same conditions, a 50 foot waterline should do 225nm; a 40 foot waterline 200nm and a 30 foot waterline 175nm. If you do less you should put more sail up. It's not wise to go slow because you expose yourself to more weather, more passing waves and more wear and tear on the equipment.

I must say that I am not very much impressed with the Oyster performance. When Artemis (Sundeer 64 hull #1) won the ARC, the defeat of the Oysters was so utterly complete that the Sundeer got a handicap from that day on which will never enable them to win again. That's what you get with Oyster as the main sponsor ;-)

I wonder about the elapsed time record Artemis set... does anyone know where to find the ARC records set over the years?



cheers,
Nick.

I don't know where to find ARC records from so far back. You can get them back to 2001 on the ARC site.

I do know that that Moody 64, Independence, is supposed to have been the first cruising boat ever to complete the ARC at an overall average of more than 200 miles per day, so Artemis must have been slower (if she was competing as a cruising boat and not in the racing division). Last year (in 2008), there were two very mean racing machines, a Volvo Open 60 and a Wally 80 -- not comparable to our cruising tubs in any way -- locked in a duel over most of the race. They completed 2700 miles in 12 days. That's 225 miles per day. In a Volvo Open 60 with a full professional racing crew.

So maybe some boats can make 200 miles in one particularly good day (I never have, not even on that Swan); maybe some super-cruising boats like a Sundeer can make 250 miles in one particularly good day, but that is very different from doing it day in, and day out, over the course of a long passage.

So I don't know -- 200 miles a day may be "silly" for you, but for me, so far in my sailing career, it might as well be the sound barrier. Maybe some day.

[daddle]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

Your logic defies laws of nature...spell it out for others

I'm sure quite a few others here know that we frequently sail on a "run" with the wind well forward. However if by "run" you mean "dead downwind" you are correct. But few will sail dead downwind if other angles are faster. On speedy modern boats this is making anything resembling a spinnaker impossible to fly. The only point of this diversion is to show that your posts are lacking some veracity.

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

Well, if anything is silly in this thread it's to call Beowulf anything different than a ketch. I am not going into that argument. But who is Skip?

Skip Dashew? The guy on Beowolf here?

She looks a little like a ketch...but then it looks more like the designer has avoided many of the disadvantages of a ketch? Almost like two sloops :-)

Hmmm, looks like Skip is sailing fast, pretty deep downwind (judging by the swell), with the apparent wind well forward, using sails other than spinnakers....

[Christian Van H]

I believe their names are Steve and Linda Dashew. Their daughters are Sarah (See here: Amazon.com: Where I Belong: sarah dashew: MP3 Downloads ) and Elyse. You can call me Skip when I'm at the helm too...

[matoi]

It has more rake. When we have a lot of upwind sailing ahead of us we rake it even more. This is common for ketches. I've seen photo's of historic ketches (like from the 1800's) that were much more drastic than anything seen today.

Here is an illustration of an old Swansea pilot with such drastic mizzen rake (from the wonderful book "The Sailing Pilots of the Bristol Channel" by Peter J. Stuckey):



But I haven't found an explanation on the reasons behind this. So, Nick, could you please explain why is it in your experience better to rake the mizzen when sailing upwind?

Thanks, regards,
Mato