Pilothouse Variations -- Boreal

[TeddyDiver]

Originally Posted by Polux

I have posted only racing boats to show how the hull evolution towards a better sailing performance reflects itself later in cruising boats, bettering their sail performance.

Better sailing performance within the rating rule, that is whatever that happen to be.. You should take a look how Rules have influenced into boatdesign during the last one-and-a-half century era and you'd notice rule is the main force in boat design and who is the best sandbagger.. And in some cases we have made a full circle back to hull forms which were used in the times of the original Sandbaggers.

Not that I have anything against racing but the problem lies how their bizarre things creap into recreational cruising..

BR Teddy

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Discoveries are "ugly boats"? I think Paolo is being provocative here

If the hull is "outdated", then strange that Ron Holland, one of the world's great designers, continues to design new boats with exactly the same hull form.

The new Discovery 58:



the Discovery 55:



The hull form is exactly the same as the "outdated and ugly" Moody 54 (designed by Bill Dixon), also the brand new Oyster 545 and 475 (designed by Ron Holland, and the latest Hallberg Rassies, designed by German Frers.

For an evolutionary dead end, this direction in hull form design seems to have a lot of life left in it, and that's a lot of great designers to be stuck in the past with "obsolete" designs.

In fact current fashions in hull form in France and Germany do not point the way to the future. They are just a different set of compromises, and a different fashion, driven in many cases also, as several people have mentioned, cheapness and hull volume.

There is a lot of misunderstandings on your post and I am not trying to be provocative, but clear.

Starting with Ron Holland, that was a major contributor to yachts design in the 70's and 80's, today he, like some other old glories, does not design contemporary designs, state of the art designs. Have a look at the latest news on his site:
Ron Holland Design
In its site he still points to its racing pedigree, on the early 70's, design evolutions that he passed to his cruising boats.

Yes, I agree that the Discovery 58 is an outdated design that tries to please very conservative sailors that like outdated designs (they are few and few).

Regarding German Frers you are way out. His last design for Halberg Rassy features a modern hull, with the beam brought back. The last one is the 44:

The same with the previous design, the 412:

And even older designs like the 64 shows clearly a more moder hull (considering the Discovery 58):


Regarding the Oyster the 545,it has not a new hull . The boat is a MKII from the Oyster 54. It has a 11 year old hull and that shows clearly on the outdated design.

The Oyster 475 it is not a MKII, but almost. It is a lengthened Oyster 46 and the design of the Oyster 46 is from 9 years ago, but even so it is already a more modern hull than the Moody 54 (from 2000).
Oyster 46:

Moody 54:
The Oyster has a bigger transom due to the beam more brought back. Regarding those two Oysters they are not from Ron Holland but from Humphreys.

I have already said that your boat was a state of the art design regarding the time it was designed (1999/2000) but if you look at contemporary designs from Bill Dixon you will see clearly the evolution on hull design. Here the new Moody 54:


Some more confusion regarding you saying that I say that the Moody 54 is ugly. I said that I find the Discovery 55 ugly not the Moody 54 (old model). The fact that a design is outdated does not make it necessarily ugly, just outdated. I find some modern classic designs beautiful and they are outdated in many design aspects regarding a functional perspective, that values sailing performance.

Contrary to what you say state of the art design has nothing to do with the boat being French, German or British but it has to do with more conservative clienteles and most of all with the NAs.

If the design is not a classic one but a hull design that maximizes sail performance and if the design comes from one of the top NA cabinets you can be sure it will not be an outdated one but one that will reflect state of the art in design.

And it has nothing to do with countries because top cabinets are international, being them located in America, like Farr or Reichel & Pugh, in France like Finot/conq, Berret & Racoupeau or Marc Lombard or in UK like Humphreys and many others In Germany, South Africa, Argentina or Spain.

Yacht design is an universal discipline.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by TeddyDiver

Better sailing performance within the rating rule, that is whatever that happen to be.. You should take a look how Rules have influenced into boatdesign during the last one-and-a-half century era and you'd notice rule is the main force in boat design and who is the best sandbagger.. And in some cases we have made a full circle back to hull forms which were used in the times of the original Sandbaggers.

Not that I have anything against racing but the problem lies how their bizarre things creap into recreational cruising..

BR Teddy

Today top boat racing development comes not from IRC or any other rating rule but from the so called Open classes were the rules are very open and a big hull design variety is allowed.

Biggest developments on racing offshore boats come from the Open 60's (IMOCA), from the class 40 (the Pogo 12.50 has a class 40 hull), from the mini series and from the Volvo Ocean race before they committed the major crime to make it a one class race.

Also the classes that have a bigger influence in cruising boat's design are not the ones that you need a 10 crew to race the boat but the ones where the boats are solo sailed and for obvious reasons: A racing boat to be able to be sailed solo (many times on autopilot) has to be much more easy to sail than one that requires 10 crew and easiness and solo sailing are very much appreciated by cruising sailors.

The type of hulls that can provide that superior easiness are the major influence on cruising design.

[hoppy]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Here is the new Hallberg Rassy 64:

Attachment 124799


Hot off the pen of German Frers and introduced last year. I guess Frers didn't get Paolo's memo that such hull forms are "ugly and outdated"

I really like this boat for a few reasons. It has the dinghy garage, a really good solution which makes the dinghy garage a super lazarette. Dinghy garages under aft cockpits works far worse than this.

Not, hot off the pen at all, the 64 is from his old design philosophy. He has updated his design philosophy for the new Halberg Rassey 44. This one is so new that the first boat wont be finished until winter. Wide stern and twin rudders, a very up to date design

[Polux]

Originally Posted by neilpride

The Pogo 12,5 is just a windsurf board downwind , far from a cruising boat concept, unless you are 20 years old and want the sporty ride 24/7/365

That is not the opinion of Bob Perry that says that it would be the type of boat he would prefer for himself (to sail the Pacific) and he is not properly a kid.

Also, the first concept on that boat series, the Pogo 10.50 was designed initially as a personal cruising boat for the designer himself (Finot) and he was probably over 60 at that time.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by mitiempo

Paulo

Dockhead said grey water - that is sink and shower outlets, not head outlets. Head outlets are black water.

Then it seems I did not understood. The idea has merit especially if Turkey implements the draconian law that exists already but that has not been applied.

According to Turkish law on the best cruising locations it is not only forbidden to discharge black water but also grey water. If that demand starts to be enforced there and in on other places, than it makes sense to use that dead weight and big tankage for practical purposes: more RM.

[malbert73]

Originally Posted by Polux

I guess your idea of normality is linked with outdated design. I have posted here about all types of contemporary boats. I have been very carefull not even to post cruiser racers, meaning the ones that are more used to race than to cruise and you talk about fantasy concepts and F1 as reference to those designs The only thing in common between them is that they are not cruiser racers and they are contemporary designs.

It seems you associate contemporary design with F1 and fantasy concepts but those boats are not racing boats and are not fantasy since they are bought by many cruisers.

So, I took a lot of time to see all the boats I have posted on this thread and I will say all brands and the type of program they are designed to fulfill, according to the designers and the sailors that buy them:

Boreal 47-Voyage boat, Hanse 415- main market mass production boat, Hanse 575-main market mass production boat, Hanse 34-main market mass production boat, Pogo 12.50-fast voyage boat, JPK 38-fast voyage boat, Discovery 48, medium weight main market boat, Gunfleet 58, medium weight voyage boat, Luffe 4004-performance cruiser, RM 1600-fast voyage boat, Pogo 50-fast voyage boat, Revolution 29-small aluminium voyage boat, Garcia 52-Voyage boat, OVNI 52-voyage boat, Cigale 16-fast voyage boat, Adventure 55-Fast voyage boat, Salona 60-performance cruiser, X6- fast voyage boat, Solaris 58-performance cruiser, Italia Yacht 15.99-main market cruiser, Euphoria 54-main market cruiser, Advanced 60- main market cruiser, Halberg Rassy 44-main market cruiser, Pogo 36-small fast voyage boat, Allures 52-Voyage boat, Nordship 430DS-voyage boat, CR 440-Deck saloon, CR 480- Deck Saloon, Boreal 52-Voyage boat.

I have posted only racing boats to show how the hull evolution towards a better sailing performance reflects itself later in cruising boats, bettering their sail performance.

I don't understand how you can associate the cruising boats I have posted (all above) to F1 or fantasy concepts, posters on a wall of a teenager.

Some that you have listed certainly are cruisers. Many of the ones you have listed as fast voyage boats have wide open transoms which preclude a lot of storage in lazarettes, or any chance of dinghy davits as well. Not sure where tankage resides in some of these boats either. And many have mid-cockpit travelers for mainsheets which is decidedly a more racer than cruiser feature, unless you like being flung overboard at night during a crash jibe. Of course, that's if a rogue wave doesn't wash you out of the open transom. So yes, they are as suited for voyaging as a lamborghini for road trips. You can go cross country in a lamborghini, but the SUV will be more comfy and carry more gear.


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[Polux]

Originally Posted by TeddyDiver

You are right, a lot of generalization. The stability curves of older vessels were based on hull volume only without any superstructure so you can't compare them to more recent ones.
What comes to "excellence" of high AVS you keep insisting something around 130deg being so which is just a tad more than the minimum of 120deg.

-120 to130 poor
-130 to140 adequate
-140 to150 good
-150 -> excellent

BR Teddy

I don't know where you get the idea that an AVS from 120º to 130º is poor but obviously you don't know that many boats on that tragic fastnet had AVS close to 100º

Here the AVS of some boats:
Catalina 42: 105º....Discovery 55: 122º....Moody 56: 120º....Najad 440:122º....Najad 380: 128º....Malo 40: 130º....Najad 570; 127º....Oyster 49: 118º....Oyster 655: 125º....Rustler 42: 123º....Southerly 42RS: 119º....Swan 38: 115º....Swan 40 : 112º....Swan 44: 123º...Swan 53: 107º....Westerly Ocean 43: 129º

Do you think they all have a poor AVS

In fact is not dificult to have a 180º AVS, a sphere or a cylinder will have it...and will be rolling all the time You don't want to have a boat with a very high AVS but that will be easily rolled. When a boat capsizes many bad things can happen, from serious injuries to a very frequent broken mast.


Regarding the stability of a boat AVS is only a factor that has to be seen with other factors: Overall positive stability, proportion between positive and negative stability, RM at 90º, downflooding angle and so on.

For the ones that want to understand it better I have several posts about stability on my blog.

[Juho]

Originally Posted by Polux

In fact is not dificult to have a 180º AVS, a sphere or a cylinder will have it...and will be rolling all the time You don't want to have a boat with a very high AVS but that will be easily rolled. When a boat capsizes many bad things can happen, from serious injuries to a very frequent broken mast.

I believe Nauticat 385 has a 180° AVS. It must be the pilothouse that does it. Probably not a very rolling boat.

Maybe 170° AVS would be as good in practice. Maybe a strong righting moment at 95° (when the mast hits the water) would be a useful property.

[Snowpetrel]

Originally Posted by Polux

Today top boat racing development comes not from IRC or any other rating rule but from the so called Open classes were the rules are very open and a big hull design variety is allowed.

Biggest developments on racing offshore boats come from the Open 60's (IMOCA), from the class 40 (the Pogo 12.50 has a class 40 hull), from the mini series and from the Volvo Ocean race before they committed the major crime to make it a one class race.

Also the classes that have a bigger influence in cruising boat's design are not the ones that you need a 10 crew to race the boat but the ones where the boats are solo sailed and for obvious reasons: A racing boat to be able to be sailed solo (many times on autopilot) has to be much more easy to sail than one that requires 10 crew and easiness and solo sailing are very much appreciated by cruising sailors.

The type of hulls that can provide that superior easiness are the major influence on cruising design.

Open box rules aren't so open polux, the 10 deg movable ballast rule penalises narrow boats. The 5 movable apendages rule penalises DSS concepts that allow narrow boats to surf as well or better than wide boats. The new bow girth rules disallow scow bows because they were considered too fast and could obsolete the existing fleet (also introduced in the tp52, and imoca40 classes. The imoca 60's now use one design keels and rigs. The 32 tm max RM penalises heavy boats. The nature of the races they are designed for means they are heavily optimised for fast reaching and running, and are not so good all around.

Rules like IMS try to be much more balanced, producing boats that are often much better all rounders.

But if we chuck out all the artifical constrants, we often end up with something looking remarkably like the Dashews boats, or Rocket science. Long lean, and easy to sail with modest rigs needed to drive them.

Racing rules often apply constraints. If you constrain length you end up with wide boats, like the box rule boats (box rules produce boxes aka scows, so now we have wedge rules..) If you constrain sail area you end up with long narrow light boats with tall high aspect rigs. Like the square meter boats. If you constain beam you end up with long narrow boats.

A boat design I really respect is oceanseasprays Nordkyn. It has a very balanced approach to everything, with sensible compromises for cruising long distance and sailing well, safely and comfortably. I'd pull out the bow a few degrees though so the anchor don't bang..

http://nordkyndesign.com/nordkyn/

[Snowpetrel]

Originally Posted by hoppy

Not, hot off the pen at all, the 64 is from his old design philosophy. He has updated his design philosophy for the new Halberg Rassey 44. This one is so new that the first boat wont be finished until winter. Wide stern and twin rudders, a very up to date design

This boat looks so wrong. What is going to happen to those rudders when the boat runs aground, and lays over? No propwash over the rudders will make maneuvering that much harder.

Tuning those twin rudders for toe in/toe out will be a nightmare, and the extra steering friction will make the helm much less direct.

And the windward rudder will catch every bit of weed and flotsom.

[hoppy]

Originally Posted by Snowpetrel

This boat looks so wrong. What is going to happen to those rudders when the boat runs aground, and lays over? No propwash over the rudders will make maneuvering that much harder.

Tuning those twin rudders for toe in/toe out will be a nightmare, and the extra steering friction will make the helm much less direct.

And the windward rudder will catch every bit of weed and flotsom.

So you are saying that the designer hasn't got a clue about how to design a cruising boat?

Every boat is a compromise in design and because of this, no boat is perfect even when it is designed for a narrow focus. I'm sure that over in the Bestaver thread, Nolex & SWL have had to make compromises choosing one feature over another.

I'm sure that when Dockhead looks at his pilothouse options he probably realises he's making compromises in other areas.

I agree about the twin rudder and prop wash, but why limit the design of a boats ability to sail because of poor marina performance? I'm happy without a bow thruster on my boat, but if I had twin rudders, then I would get one. Problem solved.

[Snowpetrel]

^^ no I am saying that style of hull shouldn't need twin rudders to be easily controlled. It looks to me like they grafted it on to look "modern", a single deep spade rudder would be simpler, faster and cheaper. How many modern racing boats have twin rudders. Only those that are so wide and light that they need them.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Polux

There is a lot of misunderstandings on your post and I am not trying to be provocative, but clear.

Starting with Ron Holland, that was a major contributor to yachts design in the 70's and 80's, today he, like some other old glories, does not design contemporary designs, state of the art designs. Have a look at the latest news on his site:
Ron Holland Design
In its site he still points to its racing pedigree, on the early 70's, design evolutions that he passed to his cruising boats.

Yes, I agree that the Discovery 58 is an outdated design that tries to please very conservative sailors that like outdated designs (they are few and few).

Regarding German Frers you are way out. His last design for Halberg Rassy features a modern hull, with the beam brought back. The last one is the 44:

The same with the previous design, the 412:

And even older designs like the 64 shows clearly a more moder hull (considering the Discovery 58):


Regarding the Oyster the 545,it has not a new hull . The boat is a MKII from the Oyster 54. It has a 11 year old hull and that shows clearly on the outdated design.

The Oyster 475 it is not a MKII, but almost. It is a lengthened Oyster 46 and the design of the Oyster 46 is from 9 years ago, but even so it is already a more modern hull than the Moody 54 (from 2000).
Oyster 46:

Moody 54:
The Oyster has a bigger transom due to the beam more brought back. Regarding those two Oysters they are not from Ron Holland but from Humphreys.

I have already said that your boat was a state of the art design regarding the time it was designed (1999/2000) but if you look at contemporary designs from Bill Dixon you will see clearly the evolution on hull design. Here the new Moody 54:


Some more confusion regarding you saying that I say that the Moody 54 is ugly. I said that I find the Discovery 55 ugly not the Moody 54 (old model). The fact that a design is outdated does not make it necessarily ugly, just outdated. I find some modern classic designs beautiful and they are outdated in many design aspects regarding a functional perspective, that values sailing performance.

Contrary to what you say state of the art design has nothing to do with the boat being French, German or British but it has to do with more conservative clienteles and most of all with the NAs.

If the design is not a classic one but a hull design that maximizes sail performance and if the design comes from one of the top NA cabinets you can be sure it will not be an outdated one but one that will reflect state of the art in design.

And it has nothing to do with countries because top cabinets are international, being them located in America, like Farr or Reichel & Pugh, in France like Finot/conq, Berret & Racoupeau or Marc Lombard or in UK like Humphreys and many others In Germany, South Africa, Argentina or Spain.

Yacht design is an universal discipline.

Paolo, you cherry pick one smaller HR and one or two Oysters, and ignore the very latest designs from each, which do not have "wedgie" form. You are inventing a story of "inevitable progress" which is simply not true. You repeat the words "state of the art" and "modern" over and over again, like a prayer, but just saying it over and over again, does not give the idea reality.

But we've been around the houses a few times, and I think we've covered this subject pretty thoroughly, and there's not much sense in arguing about it any more.

It boils down to this: Some people think that hull forms are moving off in one direction, and there is a "true path" of progress, and hull forms not conforming to the "true path" are "outdated". This point of view is based on a strong belief in progress -- that every day new discoveries are being made which are incorporated into "state of the art" designs, which leave other designs as "outdated". Any designer who continues to design hulls which don't (for example) have giant transoms with the beam taken all the way back, are either dinosaurs who don't "get it" (Ron Holland), or are just pandering to dinosaur sailors who don't "get it" (German Gref, Rob Humphries).

Other people disagree. They believe that this point of view deeply confuses fashion with progress. They do not believe that progress occurs so quickly -- that very few fundamental discoveries in hydrodynamics have been made in the last decades, and different hull forms are much more a different set of compromises, than progress. These people do not deny that there is any such thing as progress at all -- but real progress, that is discoveries about hull form which really change everything, such that hardly anyone goes back -- is very slow and much more elusive than glossy magazine articles would have you believe. Some hull form feature might gain or lose fashion, but most often this is just a different set of compromises, and very often the reason for the fashion has nothing to do with sailing efficiency, but rather cheapness, and giving an impression of "progress" (think Cadillac tail fins) which helps sell boats.


We're just going to have to agree to disagree! I think both points of view have been pretty well articulated.


I'm off on another long passage -- leaving Stockholm to cross the entrance to the Gulf of Bothnia and the Archipelago Sea on the way to the Eastern Gulf of Finland -- last leg of my Baltic transit. We'll pass 60 degrees N. We've made a thousand miles so far in the last few weeks and burned only 1/4 tank of diesel fuel -- the wind and weather gods have been smiling on us. Today and tomorrow however we face a cold F7 from the North and it could get a little rough. I'll be offline for a few days, so wish you all the best.

[TheThunderbird]

Originally Posted by Cadence

Originally Posted by Dockhead View Post

....
Few of the boats shown in Polux's posts in this thread have anything to do with normal cruising boats. They are like the Lamborghinis, F1 cars, and fantasy concept hot rods taped to a teenage boy's bedroom wall.

Ditto

I can not disagree....
Salons, pogo,... all boats derived by the Wallys concept, good for day-light and delight cruising