Trimaran - Especially Searunner - Owners

[gskufner]

Some other rigging and sail question.
Has anybody changed the backstay into running backstays, which attach to the outriggers so that the mail sail could have a big roach? I have running back stays, but they do not ge to the top of the mast.They are attached to the cross beams
I am considering it on my Searunner 31

[Cavalier MK2]

That is a good question for Marples if it is a a-frame boat. I'd worry about the diagonal loads. The old fashioned way is to have running backstays to the main hull transom but that takes coordinated tacking and jibing with a strong mainsheet track to take any transition loads. You wouldn't want to go any further aft than the beam but might want to consider moving the backstay forward and use a bridle to connect to the front and aft beams to even out the torsion loads. Your mainsheet then tensions the forstay but that could be done with main hull running backs but with more clutter. This sort of set up is more usual with a fractional rig but you'd need to watch moving the CE too far aft of the CLR for balance.

[Mark Johnson]

Originally Posted by gskufner

Some other rigging and sail question.
Has anybody changed the backstay into running backstays, which attach to the outriggers so that the mail sail could have a big roach? I have running back stays, but they do not ge to the top of the mast.They are attached to the cross beams
I am considering it on my Searunner 31

This sort of thing has been done, but I advise against it. Searunners were designed to be headsail driven boats, as were most of the boats designed back then.

IF you put a huge roach on the mainsail, with the mast still where it is, the boat would be ridiculously out of balance. It would be a dogamaran. Also, if you run double backstays, one to each ama, headstay tension would suffer due to flexing of the hulls, (being pulled up on from a place that they were not designed to be pulled up on).
With a slacker forestay, drive from the all important headsail would diminish.

For a large roach mainsail to balance on a Searunner, either the hull must be lengthened, Like Jim Watson (of Gougeon Bros) did, OR the mast must move forward. (likely both) Moving the mast forward introduces other problems too, as it is no longer on the strongest part of the boat.

On Jim Watson's racing Searunner, Atom, he "stretched" his SR 25 in length, and put a rotating wing mast on it, (not sure exactly where the new mast was located). It was not a cruiser this way, but presumably made a really fun daysailor/racer... LOTS of time and money go into such a project. HIS was successful.

Another semi successful example:
My first sail on a SR 34 was on a friend of a friend's modified 34, Osprey. Rick kept the hull stock, but made a very expensive and time consuming rotating wing mast for it, with about a 24" chord. This would accommodate his modern "huge roach" fully battened main... He moved the mast forward as required, putting it on a much weaker part of the cabin for bearing a compression load.

He got away with this only because the rig was totally slack! It was rigged like a beach cat, with just 3 wires, going to a point about 3/4 the way up.

The forestay supported a small jib, just like on modern cats, and side support ran from the mast to the ama runners' chainplates. The mast could flop all around at the dock, or anchored out, but behaved under sail, until going down wind in a chop. Then it could flop around...

Also, it was not a self feathering wing mast, but had the equivalent of a small traveler, connected to a 14" long boom, behind the mast to control it. Every change of heading required an adjustment.

Of coarse, the boat was a real handful in a hurricane, with the mast making up a permanent (= non reefable) part of the sail plan.

It was fast! It was also no longer a cruiser, and not being really really fast, it was a white elephant. Like putting a V-8 engine in a VW beetle... It doesn't make it a racer.

For your 31, the practical solution for making just a fun/fast, daysailor out of it, is first off... lighten the boat. Strip off everything you don't need. Then have a really smooth bottom. That makes far more difference than you'd think... A hard paint like Trinidad, can be burnished out really slick! Wipe off the slime every time you go out, we usually do.

After this, if you have the money to burn, get high tech mylar headsails & a fully battened main. (I have full battens, and a slight (6") roach on our main), and it does a bit of good, but I go almost as fast with the main still on the boom. Like I said, these are headsail driven boats...

If you're not broke yet, try adding a screacher, rolled on its own luff wire, flown from a short carbon fiber sprit, OR add a variety of down wind spinnakers of your choosing.

The above gets expensive, but will at least work well. Moving the mast, and lengthening the hull, however, get far MORE complicated, expensive, and time consuming.

You can also trade her in for a faster design of boat. Searunners were designed for something else after all. They were designed to be the best possible tropical cruisers, with safety, sea kindliness, storage galore, windward ability, and a pretty good turn of speed too.

Things to think about...

Mark

[Cavalier MK2]

You'd have to put the mast over the main strength bulkhead, at least with the back edge, which should then be beefed up remembering the load has to go to the keel. Sister bulkhead/beam frames to the main hull sheers would help spread the load, hull subframes would help. . The head compartment opening would then get vertical timbers on each side connecting to a floor beneath the sole. The top of the "beam' then needs a structure up to the cabin roof to transfer the mast loads.

What you have then is more of a big SR25 setup or sloop. It could be a hotter cruiser but is a big project for the return.

[slowbat]

Nice looking SR31 on CL in SF, a few more photos on CL of it from the FL Keys Looks like they want to trade or 10K

Has anyone seen this boat?

[Cavalier MK2]

Has anyone made carbon fiber a-frames yet? That seems like a good modification.

[PJOHara]

Our Searunner34 is rigged somewhat like what you're suggesting. it's a cutter modified to be a Bergstrom rig. Both sets of spreaders were cut to lead aft 23 degrees . we replaced the single chainplate for the aft lower with one that accepts all 3 wires. the stays were left the original length and were able to be tuned with the turnbuckles. we took the backstay off and binned it ( needed replacing anyway). two pieces of spectra with eyesplices were attached to the masthead and led to blocks bonded/through bolted to the after sides of the sterncastle. we tension the backstays with the headsail winches on the aft cabin top. bungees pull the backstays out to the lifelines when not in use. the new mainsail has 5 battens and is about 378 sq ft. the rig isn't what I would call balanced, but it's not bad, boat tracks very well. if you're sailing with just the main, you need to ease it each time you tack or the boat won't bear off. if you sail off anchor you have to get some headsail out to have control. on the other hand, even dead downwind it sails better with just the main than with just the genoa, especially with a couple of reefs. go figure....

was it worth it? depends. the bulk of our sailing is on Barnegat bay, where it's typically dead upwind, then dead downwind. even offshore vacation destinations are like that with the prevailing winds. The original battenless main and 150 genoa had the boat tacking through 115 degrees in 15 knots, flat water. now 90 degrees is standard. light air performance is better, but overall after a full day or two worth of sailing we still average the same speeds over the bottom at days end.

one downside is dead downwind. the sail lays on the spreaders, spoiling the shape. another is reefing when off the wind - you need to point up enough to get the sail off the spreaders to get it down enough to reef.

overall this setup has worked well for the way we use our Searunner. we're years away from being able to cruise full time, and really, just adding a standard main would make the rig more seakindly for long passages offshore.

Pat

[Mark Johnson]

Very interesting Pat.

Good that this is rig is working out for you. You sound OK with the trade offs... One thing I was surprised about was the "only tacking through 115 degrees" with the standard sailplan set up. I wonder why so poor?

Delphys can EASILY tack through 90 degrees, in winds from 10 to mid 20 knots, and much higher winds result in only a slight decrease in the apparent wind angle.. When I say "tack through 90 degrees", I mean "made good" including taking leeway into account... This was verified by looking at the GPS/computer's track, after crossing the Gulf of Mexico, all day long, hard to windward, in very rough seas, with a heavily loaded boat. It was all 90 degree steps, like stairs.

Our cutter rig is in the standard location, 4.5' taller, sailed as a sloop, (with lapper only or staysail only for headsails), and the runners' chainplates were moved one station forward, (for a better boom angle down wind). The caveat here, is that when its blowing a gale, and the staysail is needed, I have to go out and put 5 turns on the "quick adjust handle turnbuckles", to really crank them down. For these runners only, DUX synthetic works great.

John Marples and I talked "perfect cruising Searunner rigs", at length, BEFORE I made these changes. After decades of feedback from hundreds if not thousands of experimenting clients, combined with 30,000 sea miles on his own Searunner, (including winning the Transpac), the rig we made on Delphys was the best "cruising" rig for Searunners, that he advised. I agreed, and think it is still true. Of coarse our conversations covered new mast locations, totally different sorts of rig, rotating wing mast, huge roach mains, etc. None were applicable to Searunners.

For daysailing and weekend racer/cruisers, VS "hard core cruising", the best rig scenario changes just a little, and "experimentation" is fine. The basics remain the same though... These hulls were designed around the rig at the same time. The rig was not decided upon after drawing the hull. Searunners are more "integrated" than any design that I know of. They're brilliant! I suspect that even for a fast daysailor/racer only... what we did on Delphys (perhaps with lighter/faster sails & running rigging), along with better down wind sails, like a screecher on a sprit, and sailing EMPTY, with a burnished bottom, Would still be the fastest rig applicable to a Searunner.

BTW... for actual cruising, where you stay on one heading for days, I would never let the main lay against or even touch the spreaders or running backs. We don't do it, even for 5 minutes. IF you have REALLY expensive sails, good for decades, like we do, this is murder on the stitches. To prevent this, when we go off the wind, and the boom is out, I rig a 4/1 tackle as a preventer, from the boom, to a pad eye near the ama hatch. This stabilizes the boom from swinging in a seaway, "prevents it", and pulls it down hard. By flattening the sail, it pulls the belly of it off of the runners, for "0" chafe, ever! I do lose a very small amount of sail shape here, but the difference in boat speed is not measurable. When not using the staysail, (99% of the time), I also move the leeward runner forward for a slightly better boom angle... but without chafe!

For your current needs, you seem to be happy with what you have, so it must be right, and I would never disagree with it... I do wonder however, why folks choose Searunners for racer/cruiser/daysailors, when there are so much better designs out there for this.

30 year old, but still sound, racing tris are out there, and often cheaper than buying a Searunner and then changing the rig. The racing tri, (like a 31' Twiggy), will still blow away even the fastest Searunner in the world.

Regards,
Mark

[multihuler]

Brand new (unfinished Marples 34) Includes $40k worth of brand new parts $34,900 and rare 34' Gougeon/Gardiner racing trimaran,carbon mast,very fast,2000lbs. FUN PHOTO ALBUM included.......775 827 278six pst multihuller's Library | Photobucket

[Mark Johnson]

DESIGN CHOICES:
In looking over Multihuller's "fantastic" Photobucket album, thanks for that!

There are several designs, particularly the sexy one that comes up first, which are a case in point about the difference between fast daysailor/racer/weekend cruiser designs, and our "highly developed for cruising"... Searunners. Our boats are fast and weatherly, for cruisers, but not when up against boats that were designed purely for speed.

Searunners were designed with a whole different concept in mind, and do that well. If you want good performance, really good performance, and a "daysailing weekender" is how you use the boat, then you can tweek your Searunner all you want, and spend thousands on "better" rigs, but you may well spend more money than getting a high performance design in the first place, that was not made for long distance cruising at all.

Even AFTER spending a wad, on go fast rigs and such for your Searunner, as I said... we can NOT compete performance wise, with boats designed purely for speed, that were built at 1/4th the weight for a given length!

John's winning the Transpac on Bacchanal was an exception, but he was up against faster boats for sure. Superb seamanship, a world class gung ho crew, luck, and some of the competition trashing their own boats, all came into play.

If I get tired of free diving and cruising, I'd love to have a true speedster. What a blast to sail! (Perhaps a small one)???


BOAT PROJECTS:
I'm not pointing my finger at ANY one boat's photos in this Photobucket collection, since there were a number of boats pictured in here, and one can't tell what photo goes with what boat... There were some photos, however, that showed evidence of an often repeated, major mistake, that first time boatbuilders sometimes do... Allow UV DAMAGE to the epoxied hulls!

That is from building outside, with no structure covering the boat, OR from storing completed but "unpainted", or open decked epoxied hulls, outside, for long periods of time. Depending on latitude and sun exposure there, a "long period of time" would be longer than a few months, to perhaps even 6 months. (Personally, I would never go that long)!

Epoxy boats are vastly stronger in bond and film strength, as well as more of a total water vapor barrier than the old polyester resin glassed boats from "back in the day", (like those pictured in the Searunner Construction Manuel). Those old boats, just like my first cruiser, (which I built in the 70s), were Recorsinol glued, ring shank nailed, polyester resin/glassed boats, with carcinogenic nasty stuff slopped in the non living parts, and no epoxy, just paint inside. Outside, got a one part paint, destined to peel.

Polyester boats like this were much faster to build, and knocking them out was the name of the game. Fine craftsmanship took a back seat... Achieving both "a multi decade service life" AND our WEST system, LP painted boat's, "fraction of the maintenance", was neither hoped for nor achievable back then, not yet. We "expected" to be repainting the boat every other year or so. This was great, until something better came along... This was WEST system LP painted boats. These boats were better in every respect, EXCEPT they took longer to build, (but= less work over 30 years), cost more up front, (but cost less over 30 years), and they had poor UV resistance! They must be built and/or repaired (if longer than 6 months), out of the Sun, and before removal from their building, painted with opaque "grey" primer, under the standard white paint. Then, logically, they should get a two part LP paint, mostly because it makes no sense at all to have gone to the trouble to build a WEST system boat, and NOT get the primary reward for your trouble, which is a boat that only needs painting every 10 to 15 years. (We went 17 years on our boat's underwings) These two systems, WEST and LP paints, go hand in hand from a logical point of view...

Back in the day... BARE Polyester/glassed hulls started out being far more UV resistant than epoxy/glassed hulls. Polyester was good for perhaps a couple of years of unpainted exposure to the Sun. Then, after the boat's completion, the process of repeated sanding and re-painting over the years, (due to only having one part paints), tended to fill the micro fine cracks that resulted from too much UV exposure.

These old boats were FAR less work to build, but FAR more work to own. After 30 years, if you figure in 6X the yard bills, the old ways were more expensive too. Still, given just one or two owners, regular maintenance, and NO long spells of neglect, they would last decades too. Very few old polyester boats got this constant care, and this is why plywood trimarans became a slur word in some circles.

With many of the WEST system wood/epoxy composite boats, (or renovation projects) that I see, this epoxy UV exposure issue is ignored at great cost. After a long enough time, the clear epoxy turns hazy, then darker and darker yellow. It gets brittle, the bonds let go, glass tapes are somewhat compromised, and it eventually peels off, exposing bare wood. UV rot!

Any UNCOVERED epoxy/glass boat project, taking years to build, OUTSIDE, will have varying amounts, of some of these symptoms. AVOID IT! Don't build uncovered, as no excuse is good enough.

My polyester boat in the 70s, was mostly built under the eaves of the barn that I lived in. I had plastic to hang from the eaves as well. After the hull was glassed and dried in, I moved the hulls outside for the last two years. This was OK, solely because I covered it when I could with tarps, and it was a polyester/glassed boat! If it had been epoxy, it would be ruined... She turned out fine, however, and got one part marine enamel, (which was beginning to fail in water trap places, before the end of the first year).

My next two EPOXY/glassed projects were built inside. The first WEST system boat, (my SC 28), was built in a quickly thrown together, "temporary" dirt floor pole barn. I built the structure in the exact same spot as my first polyester boat. Many years later, a Quonset hut shaped "soft structure", would house the Delphys project near by. (This "tent" lasted 5 years, with 3 cover replacement layers added). I tore it down, but the first "temporary" pole barn structure, still stands, after 34 years! (barely, though)...

Both of these structures had numerous fans, ample fluorescent lights, the required boom box, and some form of heat in winter. (A wood stove in case #1, and a scavenged LP mobile home furnace in case #2).

EACH STRUCTURE WAS BUILT TOTALLY BY MYSELF, IN < ONE WEEK, FOR LESS THAN $1,000 EACH... "TOTAL", OVER THE ENTIRE USEFUL LIFE OF THE BUILDING. (This is counting lights, heat, fans, stereo, shelves, etc)...

I was therefore able to work all winter, no matter how cold, and deep into the night, (as was my practice).

None of my epoxied hulls, akas, or various completed parts, moved out into the UVs, until it was primed and painted. Most of you know this all too well, the UV warning is in all of the books on proper use of the WEST system, but I frequently see folks ignoring it, for years! DON'T IGNORE IT!

IF you ignore the UV warnings... Once UV epoxy rot has gotten bad on the outside of the hull, it takes varying amounts of restoration, before it can be painted. This can even include re-glassing of the entire hull & cabin, taking up countless thousands of dollars, AND countless thousands of man/woman hours. Just painting over failed, UV rotted epoxy, is a guaranteed failure of what EVER goes over it, even LPs. Just HOW bad ones UV rot is, once you have it, is a difficult judgement call...

On the UV damaged boat's "interior" epoxy coating, (left exposed outside for years), IF it has extensive thinning, is imbrittled, yellowing, and peeling, with bare spots... It must be "duct tape pulled", to remove ALL loose epoxy, profusely sanded to a glaze, then re-epoxied with 3 or 4 coats. This is VERY hard to do inside of a completed ama!

Paint will not stick to a failed interior epoxy job otherwise. It must be refurbished... This epoxy re-coating, can also rack up thousands of hours of unnecessary labor.

For any serious (non hobby) multi year "WEST system" boat project... Arranging an inexpensive covered building structure, and living as close as possible, (preferably on site), will reap dividends in the end. It may save 10X its cost! Once set up, work on the project every single day, until it is painted, and complete enough to be born into the harsh world that boats live in. Then slow down and breath. Outfitting can be done outside, on your new, low maintenance, long lived, mummified and LP painted hull. Make it a "good trip"!

I'm not trying to be a big bummer here, just pointing out that the rule about epoxy coatings and avoiding long term UV exposure, is sort of like with gravity... "It's not just a good idea, it's the LAW".

M.

[Boatguy30]

I was close to a deal on that CC 35 18 months ago for around 10K, with the "40 K in newish parts" After seeing detailed photos, it was clear the original workmanship was not great and there was quite bit of degradation from sitting and UV damage. The guy that took the pics said there was some rot in then Amas as well.

[multihuler]

The craftsmanship is incredible, look closely under the berths,look at the mini keel, Nomex floorboards! Yes, it is a shame where the epoxy is damaged but I have hired a crew with a orbital da sanders and she is coming out very nice, thank you. The famous DMC built,1977 Newick Native hull #1 was 10 times worse,she easily cleaned up,re glassed,epoxied and is gorgeous with her two part perfection paint, good for 7 to 10 more years. There is a boat for everyone, to dog someone's boat that is 3000 miles away,don't know the whole story and haven't seen it in person is big of you.(he knows who he is) This Marples will be a yacht someday and will sit above her waterline, this I can promise you. The proof is in the pictures. For those of you that don't use orbital DA sanders,ouch PS, Mark I stopped by in April, love your work,you obviously don't count your hours when you work on your 34! Hope to see you in March. The Newick is sailing from western Mexico to New Bern on her way to the GOM festival in France this May.

[Mark Johnson]

Multihuller,
Thanks for the compliments, and no, we no longer count our hours of labor. After building/rigging/outfitting, and the big year long refit... we stopped counting at >50,000 combined man/woman hours! Luckily, "maintenance" is now just replacements, like rigging. It's pretty manageable. We try to keep her in sail away condition, however, with passports close by!

Most folks' "total hours", btw, IF you count both a husband and wife team's total, are WAY more than they think, if they add up going for materials, setting up the shop, installing systems, outfitting for sea, and the inevitable "corrections".

By all means, do stop by on your way through. Visiting boats can usually find dockage at our marina, or anchor out in the creek.



ABOUT UV DAMAGE:
Hope you're not talking about "me" judging your boats pictured? I was not.

I was talking in broad generalizations for a very good reason, and intentionally prefaced my previous comments about epoxy & UV damage, with:

"I'm not pointing my finger at ANY one boat's photos in this Photobucket collection, since there were a number of boats pictured in here, and one can't tell what photo goes with what boat..."

The last thing I'd want to do is trash some one else s boat on line. From a distance it is indeed impossible to access the extent of UV damage, or how localized it is. Also, without an explanation, it is impossible to know what steps were taken to repair UV damage, before it was painted over.

If an experienced WEST system boatbuilder accesses ALL of the surfaces carefully, removes what they must, and thoroughly preps the rest with DA (Random Orbit) sanders, then he/she re-epoxies damage inside, and/or re-epoxy/glasses the outside, even fairly severe UV damage can be corrected to 100% SOUND. It is a lot of work!

I gather from your descriptions above, that this is EXACTLY what was done to achieve such gorgeous results. As a prospective buyer... If I talked to the owner/builders or refurbishers of a boat, and they showed me photos of the repair process, along with giving explanations that made sense, I would have ABSOLUTELY no reservations about buying a previously UV damaged boat, that was now "correctly" repaired to perfection. Beautiful designs such as these, are certainly worthy of the effort!

I was only directing my comments to new "inexperienced builders", so that they could prevent such an unnecessary hassle from occurring further down the line.

UV damage to epoxy is a very broad subject: I had been building boats for decades before I fully "got it" that even white paint (on "white" primer) lets in too much UVs. It allows the epoxy surface to shrink over time, causing micro-cracks, and necessitating earlier paint jobs than would otherwise be necessary. White primer is not a "disaster", nor does it cause total epoxy "failure", but on the next re-paint... ONLY opaque "grey" primer blocks those harmful UVs. Then the next paint job will last much longer. If the topcoat is an opaque color, like dark blue or green, then it IS an opaque paint job, but who would do this? Only white topcoat makes sense for most of us, as it is more reflective, and cooler.

I already mentioned that we got 17 years out of the paint that's out of direct Sunlight, under our wings. This was with our original 2 coats of white primer, and two sprayed topcoats of Sterling LP. I have NO doubt that if I had originally used my "current painting practice" under here, of 3 coats of grey primer, covered with 3 coats of white LP paint, that these underwings might not need painting again for 25, or possibly even 30 years!
I have now done this painting process "correction", over the Summer, and that part is now painted for the rest of my life... The "sunny side of the boat", of coarse, may be just 10 to 15 years between paint jobs, and we are doing it in segments...

My apologies if anyone misconstrued my comets about UV damage, as meaning anything about "these particular" boats pictured. I know nothing about them, except that regarding a couple of the boats... I'd like to own that!

Back to the original statement: If you really like to go fast, and aren't really "cruising", get a fast boat design! There are some great bargains out there. AND... If you are starting any long term WEST system boat project, build a structure over it first, and paint it before it goes into the yard.

Kindest regards,
Mark

[sea dragon]

Has anyone ever seen a good transom "sugarscoop type addition on a searunner.
I thought Maren said something about a good one,but I couldn't find it when I searched

[Mark Johnson]

Originally Posted by sea dragon

Has anyone ever seen a good transom "sugarscoop type addition on a searunner.
I thought Maren said something about a good one,but I couldn't find it when I searched

A number of folks have tried this, with the most successful probably being Jim Brown's Scrimshaw. I considered it on Delphys, and before crunching the numbers, talked about it with both Jim and John, at different times.

Jim said that he wouldn't advise it on Delphys, and more buoyancy or speed was not the reasoning for him to go sugar scoop on Scrimshaw, his 31'er.

(He was, btw, building his fantastic "nacelle sled mount" for an OB motor, at about the same time. IT was VERY successful, VS the old transom location).

About his sugar scoop... Jim said that primarily he wanted a "kick up rudder" for more easily getting into and out of his shoaling creek. The swing up sugar scoop transom/rudder combination was what he came up with. It added just a bit of needed buoyancy aft as well.

I know that plans for the OB sled option, (recommended), are out there, but don't know about the swing up sugar scoop transom for the 31'er. Ask John.

Consider... On the other boats, it becomes very complicated due to the rudder tiller arm going through the transom. It necessitates making a cut out "V" for the rudder, in the new transom's bottom plank, which negates achieving much extra buoyancy, so what's the point. Any speed advantage would be negligible. (motion too)

Building a sugar scoop transom "from scratch", onto a new boat, might be different, but "adding one", as I contemplated, meant that the weight was in addition to the existing transom, which I would NOT remove. I drew several versions, even without the cut out "V", and considered a different spade rudder set up.

My calculations came up with this:
With the new 3' long hull extension being about 2' wide and 3' long, and only 4" deep tapering down to "0" immersion, the buoyancy gained was just a bit more than the weight of the additional hull I had added on, which is 99% out of the water, creating windage, and just going along for the ride.

This was with my "guessing" a total added weight of only 100 lbs or so, IF it was made of thin glass & carbon over Kledgacell foam. The net gain was so low as to make no sense at all.

Some folks like the "boarding step transom" idea, (like on cats), and that would be their reasoning. Thing is, that the stern rail is really in the way, it is hard to get back there or from there, and the motion is the worst, due to more pitching.

The boarding ladder platform we have used for these 17 years, is the best I have seen, and I never say things like that just because I built it. Really, it's perfect. I can even board with a SCUBA tank on, (granted, with some difficulty). In the raised position, it can be deployed in seconds, and since the retainer hook is breakable plastic, I can reach up from the water, (if I fall in at anchor) and pull the ladder down. Under way, I have a 1' long rope tail on the ladder's bottom (at the mid hinge), just in case. So far so good.

In answer to the question about a sugar scoop... In my view it is a lot of work for a VERY small benefit, but Jim's was presumably a success on the 31. Like I said, ask John if you want to know what the current thinking is, but I doubt that he would advise it. He didn't advise on our 34, nor did Jim, even though HE did it on his 31.

For a small fraction of the work, I can achieve the same buoyancy advantages by doing what I have already started, replacing interior flat panels, like floorboards, cubby lids, and next, the dinette table, out of light weight composites. Roy is going this route too.

Keeping weight off of the ends of the boat or way up the mast, is the real goal, but hard to accomplish on a full time liveaboard/cruiser. We do the best that we can.

Hope this helps,
Mark