Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.