New style Harryproa cruiser

[lucdekeyser]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

I guess if you're going to play dumb, the conversation is over.
...

Sir, rest assured that I do not lack in IQ nor an understanding of the laws of physics. English is not my native tongue but I have found little difficulty in other domains of discourse. I just miss cruiser's experience. This is the purpose of this forum.
Of course, up to now, I am convinced of the HarryProa cruiser or I would not have brought it up and ask this community to critique this choice from their experience. I am sure you would too with a cat in the early days. I realize that the sailboat industry is too small to provide industrial strength assurances that I am used to in other fields of industry. This does leave the domain open to lots of opinions and strong opinions at that. I do not have problems with that but that does not mean that any long time cruiser's opinion will not be scrutinized. I also acknowledge that a forum is not the platform for a methodical treatise.

To remain on the topic at hand, I do understand that the issue brought up swapping hulls in a proa when waves and wind are from opposite direction is equivalent to any other unidirectional boat but then with bow and stern. Unless I overlook something, this is "the same difference" and no argument against either of the boat configurations. If I overlook something it is not because of my mental capacity but because I lack experience. If you feel like sharing your experience, albeit not with a proa, be my guest. I realize that going sailing with you would solve most communication problems but until then I understand that you prefer sailing than to answer posts that you find irritating.

It is true that the objections raised heretofore have not been convincing, not because I cannot be convinced but because there is relevant opinion and credible evidence to the contrary. Nevertheless, these heads up have been very informative and have strengthened my reasoning about a complex craft that is a sail boat. For that I am already grateful to this community.

[lucdekeyser]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

So it's exactly as I said, there is a little less maintenance but not a significant savings.

Again, you've done nothing to debunk the principal that you could just as easily decide on accommodations and build a cat with longer hulls to achieve better sea keeping and speed for about the same price.

Your statements remain quite broad and general. Denney's are quite detailed and verifiable. For the rigging, count the number of parts and compare. This is significant for my peace of mind. In the same vain you could as easily decide on accommodations and build a monohull with an even longer hull to achieve even better sea keeping and similar speed for about the same price. The purpose of this thread is not to convince anyone to go for a HP cruiser; the purpose of this thread is invite people with experience cruising to add to a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats analysis. I have done my homework and have read the arguments of the different sides on most issues. Some are rehashed in this thread. That is no problem. Some other suggestions merit some more thought. That is what I am after. So, the more specific the better.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by lucdekeyser

Your statements remain quite broad and general. Denney's are quite detailed and verifiable. For the rigging, count the number of parts and compare. This is significant for my peace of mind. In the same vain you could as easily decide on accommodations and build a monohull with an even longer hull to achieve even better sea keeping and similar speed for about the same price. The purpose of this thread is not to convince anyone to go for a HP cruiser; the purpose of this thread is invite people with experience cruising to add to a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats analysis. I have done my homework and have read the arguments of the different sides on most issues. Some are rehashed in this thread. That is no problem. Some other suggestions merit some more thought. That is what I am after. So, the more specific the better.

More parts = less reliable is false logic. Modern cars are drastically more reliable than 50yr old cars yet they have drastically more parts. The big difference is those parts have been added and refined to maximize thier utility and reliability. The same holds true for traditional stayed masts. You keep implying that they are falling over left and right but you fail to provide any objective data to support you assertion. Either provide supporting documentation or give up on it. Unstayed masts can and do fail, so it's not a magic bullet. All of this is quite verifiable.

Please share the statistics for increasing the length of a monohull to achieve the same effect. To achieve multihull speeds in a monohull while providing the same living space would require a drastically longer boat (probably in excess of 100ft). Now you are talking about substantial cost inefficencies as it is not just materials but the cost of yard that can handle a 100ft boat will far outweigh the extra material (which will still be far more substantial than the extra length on a catamaran compared to a proa). All this before considering ongoing storage and maintenance costs.

If you goal is to have the most interesting boat in the marina, it will win hands down. But otherwise, you haven't shown it to have any signficant advantages over a catamaran.

[rob denney]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

No, not really, because with a cat (or a tri, or a mono) there would never be a need to swap ends with a sea anchor. So even "Fairly simple" would be a lot more difficult....

Sheesh! We are talking about towing a drogue when 10+m waves are breaking over the boat at 90 degrees to the wind direction and we want to sail with the saloon door open. Not really worth discussing.

Cats and tris have one side, but 2 ends. How do they get from streaming a drogue over the back, to sitting to a sea anchor over the bows when the conditions are overwhelming the drogue? I have never done it on a proa, but would pull the drogue bridle across to the ww hull and launch the sea anchor from the lw side. As soon as the sea anchor "bit" the drogue would sink and could be pulled in easily.

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

And my experience has obviously been different from yours. I find myself sailing DDW a lot more than 1/180 of the time. Probably closer to 1/3.

As I said, no problem sailing a harryproa downwind with the sails wing and wing at 90 degrees to the boat.
Stayed cat rigs don't allow this and the main is let out to the end of the traveller where it rubs against the shrouds. Inefficient and an accidental gybe is more likely. To avoid this, a lot of cats just hoist a spinnaker, which is great until the wind changes direction and it has to be dropped and the boat luffed to hoist the main. Both scenarios are a big problem in a squall, according to numerous posters in this forum, and common sense.

On the harry rig, the whole operation is controlled by the main sheets. Ease them in a squall until the right amount of sail is working. No drama, no need to leave your seat or wake up other crew. If you decide to reef, ease them a little more, they flap, the boat slows down to a drift and reefing is an easy exercise for one person.


Valhalla: So it's exactly as I said, there is a little less maintenance but not a significant savings.

Most mast manufacturers and cruisers recommend regular trips up the mast and annual or biannual removal for a proper look for cracks and problems. On an unstayed mast, you don't.
You also don't have to luff head to wind to hoist, reef and lower the main or have to sail at night or in changeable conditions with reduced sail.
The cost savings are there, but are dwarfed by the savings in stress.

Valhalla: Again, you've done nothing to debunk the principal that you could just as easily decide on accommodations and build a cat with longer hulls to achieve better sea keeping and speed for about the same price.

Proa hulls serve different purposes. One is long, lean and low, the other comparatively short, wide and high. Using the same hull for both would result in compromises in cost, weight, speed or space. The way the Cruiser 18 is built, they would be cheaper, but nowhere near enough to justify the compromises.

You will need to supply prices for a longer hulled cat to convince me it could be built for anywhere near the price of a same length harryproa, much less a shorter one.

[Redreuben]

Valhalla;
A proa does not have the wide staying base of a cat or tri so being caught aback can be dangerous to the mast, that I believe is why Denney has gone the unstayed route, the boom can be gybed, backwinded or do circles around the mast without taking the rig down.
Cars, yes modern cars are more reliable but when they break they need a computer lab and parts warehouse to fix, old cars can be fixed with gaffer tape and baling wire.

[downunder]

Luc.

You will have no issues with Ballotta's abilities with infusion work nor finish. They do excellent work.

i would have your electrical design done for them to follow. They source their parts in USA. For cruising in tropics plan on solar of at least 1000AH and shade built into the design.

Question? How manouverable are proa's amongst coral reefs, tight marinas and mangrove creeks. This is important and an advantage of cats picking you way amomgst coral bommies in the Great Barrier reef. Without any experience with a proa this could be a issue. Rob Denny??

cheers

[lucdekeyser]

Originally Posted by downunder

Luc.

You will have no issues with Ballotta's abilities with infusion work nor finish. They do excellent work.

i would have your electrical design done for them to follow. They source their parts in USA. For cruising in tropics plan on solar of at least 1000AH and shade built into the design.

....

Thank you for the recommendation and advice. Do you mean that the shade be structurally built in the design or designed to receive a removable softtop bimini type ?

[rob denney]

Originally Posted by downunder

Luc.

How manouverable are proa's amongst coral reefs, tight marinas and mangrove creeks. This is important and an advantage of cats picking you way amomgst coral bommies in the Great Barrier reef. Without any experience with a proa this could be a issue. Rob Denny??

Long unrockered hulls don't usually turn quickly, but the shallow draft and large fore and aft rudders more than make up for this.

The motor being easily turned through 360 degrees with a big multi bladed prop will make marina and mangrove manoeuvring much easier than any other single motored multi.

Quarter hung rudders are not pretty, but they do have the benefit of having usable area from the waterline down. ie, if the boat is in 400mm deep water, they can be lifted until there is 400mm depth of rudder for steering. This won't be enough for high speed, but with the schooner rig would enable you to sail out of trouble, if required.

A benefit of the rudders being able to turn together or in opposite directions means you can crab the boat sideways, which is helpful when being blown onto a dock or wall. It is also handy if you are not quite laying an upwind mark and don't want to tack or want to get out from underneath another boat while racing. VMG suffers, but 'negative leeway", (for want of a better term), propels you to windward quite noticably.

Kick up rudders are very reliable depth sounders and less prone to damage than daggerboards, fixed keels and rudders

Thanks for the Ballotta information. Backs up what I have heard as well. So far, they have been great to deal with.

[downunder]

Originally Posted by lucdekeyser

Thank you for the recommendation and advice. Do you mean that the shade be structurally built in the design or designed to receive a removable softtop bimini type ?

I personally like rigid as it gives extra space for solar and shade and to a lesser extent weather protection is the most important factor for living in tropics. There may be a need for clever design with this vessel. I note Kelsall's proa has this in mind. If not done at build will always be more costly as an afterthought.

I don't believe a removable softop bimini is suitable for tropic living. You will note may cats originally with softops have moved to hardtops and all the production cats seem to have taken this on board.

Another thought. Ensure there is easy access built in for storage of kyacks/paddle boards such as Hugh Lowery is doing with his current St Francis 50 build. Should be very easy on this design. http://www.the-wayfinder.com/wayfind...-coming-along/

cheers

[downunder]

I note Ballotta has the Kelsall proa in the water now.

Kelsall Catamarans - Ballotta Catamarans - Custom built catamarans - Current Proyects

[smj]

Originally Posted by downunder

I personally like rigid as it gives extra space for solar and shade and to a lesser extent weather protection is the most important factor for living in tropics. There may be a need for clever design with this vessel. I note Kelsall's proa has this in mind. If not done at build will always be more costly as an afterthought.

I don't believe a removable softop bimini is suitable for tropic living. You will note may cats originally with softops have moved to hardtops and all the production cats seem to have taken this on board.

Another thought. Ensure there is easy access built in for storage of kyacks/paddle boards such as Hugh Lowery is doing with his current St Francis 50 build. Should be very easy on this design. http://www.the-wayfinder.com/wayfind...-coming-along/

cheers

I would think a removable soft top Bimini is the same as the hardtop but removable. They both provide sun protection yet the removable soft top is removable which is an asset if dealing with hurricanes. But then again the hardtop is easier to mount solar to so pick your poison.

[lucdekeyser]

Originally Posted by smj

I would think a removable soft top Bimini is the same as the hardtop but removable. They both provide sun protection yet the removable soft top is removable which is an asset if dealing with hurricanes. But then again the hardtop is easier to mount solar to so pick your poison.

Ah, compromises.
There is a trend to extend the saloon to cover most of the deck instead, like in the Rapier 550 with only a walkway aft, the Tag 60 with doors only on the side or the Gunboat 55 wide open aft.
The Kelsall being a charter boat had little choice but to roof over most of the remaining open deck.
It is very hard to resist the temptation to extend covered living spaces over the whole deck. But this would defeat the balance that is the hallmark of the harryproa concept. I am thinking, instead, of extending the saloon over one of the queen beds to enlarge the shaded area in the assumption that one queen bed would be enough for the majority of the time and occasional guests could crash in the settee converted to a bed. A small hardtop roof extension could be added just over the helm position. The combined roofs should be enough for solar panels. A large sheet hung from the masts to the windward hull could project shade on the open deck when moored.

[lucdekeyser]

Originally Posted by downunder

Another thought. Ensure there is easy access built in for storage of kyacks/paddle boards such as Hugh Lowery is doing with his current St Francis 50 build. Should be very easy on this design. Wayfinder | Wayfinder Build: Part 7 – Coming Along

cheers

That is an excellent idea. It sure was a tricky arrangement on the St Francis 50. In the HP Cruiser it is already available standard in the central toy box. It also hides the lines and the anchor and chains system.

[downunder]

Some discussion of twin rigs by Dereck Kelsall from another forum.

Quote
"Twin rigs - for more information.

The video of the Hungarian cats show them going v well as race machines. However and obviously a lot of money has been spent.

I am of the opinion that the currently popular three stay rig with large main and small headsail leaves a lot to be desired for World Cruising. When it comes to running with the wind, the angle to which the main can be let out is restricted. When sailing directly down wind, the chance of an unintentional gybe is high. Runners which we always design help but does not solve the problem. Hence our particular interest in alternatives.

This topic was discussed a little while ago, when I referred to some of the work we are doing with twin rigs. Our work is based on our experience with freestanding and of assessing KCR which uses a cross strut and crossed stays. I stressed a number of points.

1. The twin rig on a cat idea has been around for at least 40 years.
2. Cool Change is an owner built 54 foot charter cat which has sailed close to 50K sea miles with twin freestanding wings, also built by the owners. The initial plan was to use light weather head sails. However, having initially sailed without headsails, in practice Don and Marilyn have learned that their performance is exceptional with just the two mains and decided not to use any headsails.
3. We then looked again at the strut and stay option without headsails. Hence KCR, the Kelsall Cat Rig (without working headsails). We soon saw a number of advantages, particularly for all round sailing and safety and ease of steering down wind in Trade wind situations.


Freestanding is not a cheap option and we were looking at alternatives. Obviously freestanding requires a substantial mast section at the top bearing and as much bury as you can get below it. It also needs a substantial bearing system. All of this has been achieved on Cool Change, which Don says is the “awesome catamaran” which they built and have sailed, trouble free for nearly ten years.

By using the full width of the catamaran for the stays, the support angle is in the order of 20 degrees instead of the usual 10 or less. The typical head sail induces the largest load on the forestay, The loads on all parts of the KCR rig and the boat are substantially reduced. The bearings and attachments needed are simple to make and fit. The weight of the wings needed are a lot less than either freestanding or a conventional single sail plan.

Making the wings has proven to be straightforward – in foam sandwich of course and DIY. The cost when including labor cost cannot compete with a conventional rig. The cost of materials alone is not high. There is substantial saving on deck gear.

We have designs in progress for both KCR and Freestanding. I cannot say that KCR is fully tested at this time. However, I do know this. If I was planning a Round the World voyage, I would want to be able to let the sails fly when sailing directly down wind. Cats generally speaking do sail directly down wind in Trades. I would want the ease of steering of running wing and wing with both sails ahead of athwartships. Getting close to self steering is Don Logans report, where down wind steering is a real challenge with the regular cat rig.. The combination of wings and battened mains produces an excellent foil shape and accounts for most of the exceptional performance of Cool Change.

We are looking forward to learning more as the boats go afloat.

I love design arrangements which reduce the loads!!.
Happy boating,
Derek"

[downunder]

Luc,

All I say re shade is is one of the highest priorites in the tropics. If you have lived there or spent plenty of time on a vessel in that situation you will not understand.

All that charter boats(Cats) are doing is reflecting what permanent liveaboards in the tropics need. I think Kelsall's solution for shade is smart for a liveaboard.

I watch the ex racing monohulls that do day sailing in the Whitsunday Islands with no shade and smile as the badly sunburnt toursits file off at the end of the day. Shade is a big issue. The hardtop is also built for simple water catchment with a two way valve for flushing first and then filling your watertank. Think as a liveaboard.

The challenge for the designer in your case is to come up with a design that doesn't affect the balance but provide adequate shade. Stepping out of the saloon into the sun and steering in the sun is less than ideal in the tropics. This will be a problem that needs solving.

Cheers