ARC 2016 the boats and the performances

[boatman61]

Much ado about nothing..
Any info coming out of the ARC is flawed for a multitude of reasons and anyone giving credence to so called rating/performance results is just waffling for the sake of it.. it means zero.. apart from hyping up things to make the ARC seem more than it is.. a rally of multi level boats and sailors having a jolly.
About as much relevance to performance as Jeremy Clarkson in a Porsche and one of his mates on a train having a race to see who gets from Berlin to London first.
Top Gear ********.. entertaining but generally BS..

[yeloya]

Originally Posted by arsenelupiga

why do you say that. Give enough sail area and any cat will do.

However, polar from Lagoon 41 has in 25 kn true, in 120 deg true, speed 15.5 kn under spi. So, 42 slightly more. Which is pretty much conditions in video.

Trimming may be cruical. Observe & learn how nicely main & spi were interacting.

I've checked the video quite carefully. I am not blaming anybody with anything, just my toughts;

-it doesn't say if this speed is boat speed or SOG. It seems to me boat speed and you can easily calibrate it to show you whatever speed you want to see.
-the wind says 23 kts and I understand this is the apparent wind. Looking at the trim, it seems that AWA is around 100 degrees, hence the true around 130-135 or so. If so, the true must be close 30-32 kts . Look at the state of the sea; I have never seen such a flat sea when it blows over 30 kts..
-the polar diagrams are generated by computers. I haven't seen yet any polor diagram matching with the theoratical one.

Yr last question is more interesting; take a L 450 or Helia, add to the mast another 10 meter and increase the sail area by 40-50 % as you suggested and let's suppose this is possible. How much faster the boat will go ?
By doing so you are increased the power on the boat and yet this power has to be transformed to kinetic energy (speed) . The problem starts there, there are hydrodinamic , aerodynamic and hull resistances. These tend to increase as the speed increase. That's why I am saying unless you have a very favorable Hull beam to hull length ratios (over 9-10), regardless what size of sail you are putting you cannot go beyond certain speed.

Factories are never publishing this number but I would guess someting like 7-8 max for L 42 just looking at pictures. The boats that are capable double digit have this ratio higher and most of them are with retracted dagger board while sailing downwind to reduce the hydrodynamic resistance and wetted surface while FP and Lagoons have a fixed keel..

For comparison below is the video that I filmed last month near Mikonos at 33 kts of apparent with my Catana 47 sailing just over 14 kts with double reef on the main, dagger boards half retracted.. I could probably do a bit more but not more than 16 kts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGGFx-raXdw&t=3s

Cheers

Yeloya

[Polux]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

Frankly I'd never even use the word race to discribe the ARC and I'd never use any of the results to decide which boat was faster because it's an invite to cheat with such loose rules of self reporting. There is only one race with sailing boats and that's using sails only, all the other rally's including the ARC should just quit the bs and forget using the word race and forget the trophy bs as well, it's a joke.

Yes, it is not a race. On a serious race the boats are crewed by a full racing team of expert sailors with boats as light as they can be. My own boat that was used for racing by the previous owner (and not at top level) even had different and much lighter floorboards to race, water and fuel is reduced to a minimum (with the use of a water maker).

Those boats and those crews have very little in common with boats charged for a transatlantic passage and charged to be cruised for several months on the Caribbean, neither the crews of the boats that are making the ARC, out of the racing division, have anything to do with the crews of a serious sail race.

Here, on the cruising division you would have or a charter operator with paying guests bringing the boats to the Caribbean season or cruisers, sailing their boats on some cases with the help of some friends that will help sailing the boat.

Neither the crews neither the boat condition has nothing to do with racing and that is why these results are much more relevant than the ones obtained by the same boats in racing trim with a true racing crew.

Regarding the use of engine, any cruiser would use the engine on a passage if there is no wind enough to sail and if it has fuel for it. Only a racer would be stop dead on the water for a full day if he has the choice to go motoring slowly at a slow pace, wasting little fuel while they charge batteries.

Doing this has much more with cruising than the strict use of sails on a sail race.

What cruisers want to know is what is the time that a given, reasonably well sailed boat, with an average crew can make on a transatlantic passage like the ARC, a time that can be a reference regarding what they eventually can do, if they are experienced sailors and are not sailing the boat alone or with just the help of a wife, but if they took (as usual) as crew a couple of experienced cruiser friends to help sailing the boat.

This is what the ARC passage times can provide, taken from a vast pool of boats and crews, over 200, and over many years, many thousands of boats.

If you want a boat for racing, this is not the place for looking at boat's performance on a transat. If you want references regarding what a loaded cruising boat can do on a transat with an experienced cruising crew, including the use of engine, that is the place to look.

Eventually some use the engine more or less and it is why I post the engine hours of all boats I mention so, if one want's it, one can access the performance of the different boats discounting the engine hours, loaded and sailed by cruisers or average sailors.

Regarding cheating, this is not a race and I find quite offensive that someone think he is honest while other fellow sailor cruisers are by default dishonest.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

...
As has been said: it's not a race, it shouldn't be called a race....

Yes, I agree with that.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by yeloya

L 42 is a Lagoon 42and there are two this year one is called "Merci Papa" , the other is called "spirit of Catherine" and their are rated 0,996.
How do you know that L 450 is "certainly" faster ? Have you ever sailed any of them ? If L 42 is really sailing at 16 kts as the video on youtube is suggesting, she is "certainly faster than L450. I've sailed L450 and there is no way she can make 16 kts..

I know because the ratting is bigger.

You don't know, among boats that have not very different performance who is faster just for sailing them. You cannot sail them with the same wind and sea, I mean with all possible conditions.

That is much better accessed by Polar speeds made by the NA and resulting from VPP sophisticated and hugely expensive programs.

That is what is used for making the basic ratings (even for serious racing) that can have later very small corrections due to race results. The accuracy of those top VPP programs is huge.

[SVNeko]

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?sto...02688686507811

From Outremer...

[SVNeko]

https://m.facebook.com/OutremerCatam...pe=3&source=48

[Polux]

Originally Posted by SVNeko

https://m.facebook.com/OutremerCatam...pe=3&source=48

Originally Posted by SVNeko

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?sto...02688686507811

From Outremer...

So, what is the point you want to make? That the ARC is only a race (where the engine cannot be used for propulsion) for the ones on the racing division?

I guess that all know that. That cruisers use normally the engine during a cruising transat?

That is obvious, what is the point in using the engine to charge batteries and not use it for propulsion at the same time, if there is no wind. That is plain dumb for a cruiser. Even if there is no wind and one has enough fuel it is normal for a cruiser to use the engine.

The only negative point that can be made with that data posted by Outremer is if those two Lagoon 620 don't declare the engine hours at the end of the transat. I will be looking for that and I will post it here.

But I am confused with Outremer, if they want to make the ARC in racing mode (and the Outremet 5x was very well sailed, 1st or 2th on compensated in all 40 multihulls) why are they not making it on the racing class, where motoring is not obviously allowed?

That does not make sense to me.

[SVNeko]

Because it's a cruising boat. And I think they are putting those 620's on notice that they are being watched.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by yeloya

I've checked the video quite carefully. I am not blaming anybody with anything, just my toughts;

-it doesn't say if this speed is boat speed or SOG. It seems to me boat speed and you can easily calibrate it to show you whatever speed you want to see.
-the wind says 23 kts and I understand this is the apparent wind. Looking at the trim, it seems that AWA is around 100 degrees, hence the true around 130-135 or so. If so, the true must be close 30-32 kts . Look at the state of the sea; I have never seen such a flat sea when it blows over 30 kts..
-the polar diagrams are generated by computers. I haven't seen yet any polor diagram matching with the theoratical one.

Yr last question is more interesting; take a L 450 or Helia, add to the mast another 10 meter and increase the sail area by 40-50 % as you suggested and let's suppose this is possible. How much faster the boat will go ?
By doing so you are increased the power on the boat and yet this power has to be transformed to kinetic energy (speed) . The problem starts there, there are hydrodinamic , aerodynamic and hull resistances. These tend to increase as the speed increase. That's why I am saying unless you have a very favorable Hull beam to hull length ratios (over 9-10), regardless what size of sail you are putting you cannot go beyond certain speed.

Factories are never publishing this number but I would guess someting like 7-8 max for L 42 just looking at pictures. The boats that are capable double digit have this ratio higher and most of them are with retracted dagger board while sailing downwind to reduce the hydrodynamic resistance and wetted surface while FP and Lagoons have a fixed keel..

For comparison below is the video that I filmed last month near Mikonos at 33 kts of apparent with my Catana 47 sailing just over 14 kts with double reef on the main, dagger boards half retracted.. I could probably do a bit more but not more than 16 kts.

Glad you posted about that, meaning the max speed boats (cats and monohulls) are able to do when light and sailed near the limit in a very sportive way. Sure they would count if one wants to feel the exhilaration of the speed, for a short time or for a longer time with a full racing crew to control the boat, but that has to do with sailing fun, not with cruising on a Transat.

Those speeds have nothing to do with the ARC, with boats loaded and cruising crews, even if they are very good as the one in the Outremer 5x, that I believe was 1st in compensated among all the many multihulls.

We know that the Outremer can do well over 20k on the right conditions and even if very well sailed on this ARC, if you go to the tracker and look at the instantaneous speeds, you will never find a speed over 12.5k, even with 23k winds and I was only able to find it once (you can go back with the tracker and see the speeds), a couple of times slightly over 11k, several times a bit 10k but most of the time between 8 and 10K (with a decent wind).

This is the reality that his important to a cruiser, not the 20k that the boat can reach occasionally if one is sailing it with a racing spirit for some moments and that's why looking at the boats on the ARC can give a much better judgement of the cruising speed boat potential, when it is sailed by a cruising but experienced crew than any race results or any video with a max boat speed.

That is not valid only to cats but to all boats. Look at this small performance cruiser, a A35, a boat that can do easily two digit speeds and reach occasionally to 16k and over:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ai2EPi2uC2A

There is one doing the ARC sailed by a couple on the cruising division

Even being only two cruisers, being on a fast boat allowed them to go relatively fast on the beginning of the transat and you will find on the first post notice of that, but then, as many others that chose the Southern route, stayed without wind, got pissed, motored for getting out of it and as the boat has a very small diesel tank they decided to go to Cabo Verde, since they were near, for diesel, for dinning, to see the views and to see if the wind would arrive.

They had been there for almost 24 hours and since then they have been overtaking many bigger boats, they are now sailing among a group that includes a Sweden 50, a Amel Maramu 2000 and a Discovery 55, boats that did not stop at Cabo Verde.

So I would say a very decently sailed sailboat even if they obviously don't look like racers and are cruising. I had looked at the max speeds on the A35 too: Maximum speed I could find: 7.4k. Mostly doing between 5.5 and 7k with any decent wind but more times over 7k than the Outremer 5x over 11K.

Again we can see that there is a big diference between having a boat light and sailing for fun looking for the max boat speed, and what a loaded boat can make while cruising on a transat, in this case with a reduced crew.

And I guess it is enough of explanations. Fellow cruisers on the forum can appreciate the two sides regarding the ARC: That is useless as a way to provide any information regarding the cruising speed potential of a boat or that indeed it can provide some interesting information.

I know that it is the case with some due to thanks received and to personal messages thanking me by the effort in doing this thread. The others have already made their point and have no reason to stay around, unless they would add anything that had not yet been said.

[Polux]

So, after two pages of considerations and talk, lets return to the boats were he had leaved them:

The next boat is a Oyster 625

a Beneteau Oceanis 60

then a very famous one, form the racing division with a good crew the "old" Red Oyster light wave 48. This year they have been slow since, with the other small fast costumer, the Grand soleil 43, they chose the Southern route.

next another Lagoon 620

another Leopard 48

another Discovery 55

a Bowman 57

a Grand Soleil 43

a Fountain Pajot Lavezzi 40

a Jeanneau SO 49

a Lagoon 450

a Catana 42



These boats are making a fast passage. Just to give an idea two Challenge 72 race boats sail just a bit ahead of that 40ft Fountain Pajot and behind the Hanse 575. The boats on that group are between 369 and 581nm of the arrival.

After the Bowman 57, that is at 449nm from the finish, I did only consider boats with 50ft or less.

The boats that chose the Southern route made a worst choice and therefore were slower, not because of the boats or crews but because of the routing. It is the case of all the boats posted here till the Grand Soleil 43 (inclusive) with exception of the Bowman 57 that, as all the other boats after that one, chose the North route.

[Barra]

Originally Posted by Polux

So, what is the point you want to make? That the ARC is only a race (where the engine cannot be used for propulsion) for the ones on the racing division?

I guess that all know that. That cruisers use normally the engine during a cruising transat?

That is obvious, what is the point in using the engine to charge batteries and not use it for propulsion at the same time, if there is no wind. That is plain dumb for a cruiser. Even if there is no wind and one has enough fuel it is normal for a cruiser to use the engine.

The only negative point that can be made with that data posted by Outremer is if those two Lagoon 620 don't declare the engine hours at the end of the transat. I will be looking for that and I will post it here.

But I am confused with Outremer, if they want to make the ARC in racing mode (and the Outremet 5x was very well sailed, 1st or 2th on compensated in all 40 multihulls) why are they not making it on the racing class, where motoring is not obviously allowed?

That does not make sense to me.

See its 2011 all over again!

Like SV Neko says the current motorsailors are being put on notice this year so just for the i hope they stay true to history and under report their hours. I think there will be some behind the scenes pressure that whatever they log it isnt enough to change the results though.

[Polux]

and continuing, now looking at the boats of 50ft or under that are at less than 485nm and at no more than 585nm from the finish:
following the Catana 42, a Pronavia 42s (on the image the 38)

an old Swan 46

a Lagoon 42

at only 6nm an Elan 434

a Baltic 50

a First 40

another Lagon 450

and sailing partically side by side with the Lagoon, another Elan 434

a first 40.7

and a Jeanneau 50DS


Among these boats there are many bigger boats, including monohulls and multihulls. A mention of the boats above that chose the South course and that where slower due to a bad routing option should also be made and on this group almost all boats had chose the Northern option, the exceptions are the First 40, the Baltic 50.

On the next post, when the next boats reach 450nm from the arrival, I would look only to boats till 45ft, even if many bigger ones are sailing among them.

[Palarran]

Odd, Minerva of Kip has turned around.

[Polux]

Last night, about 10 hours UTC, the first small performance cruiser (or cruiser racer) arrived to Santa Lucia. The honors belong to a X41 that belong to the more sportive line of X yachts. If we consider small boats with less than 45ft, then the next boat is a Dufour 385 at 177.6nm, a Grand Soleil 43 at 282.5nm a Fountain Pajot Lavezzi 40 at 355nm and a Catana 42 at 388nn

The X41 is a great design, so good that it has not being replaced for many years. A very good sailboat, with a very nice cruising interior and with a very good performance, racing or cruising.