22 - 24 trimaran [Archive] - Boat Design Forums

jamez

07-23-2008, 05:19 AM

What are the attributes you want?

AFAIA the prototype ST7 is in build and I don't know if anyones built a Tritium. Ask Paolo the designer. Kurt Hughes has 23,24 and 26'designs plus others. Eric lerouge has a 23 and a couple of versions of a 26'. Ray Kendrick has a couple of 22's and a 26. Grainger also has a nice 26'. newick has tremolino - square and round bilge. You might also like to check out the Marples CC26 - effectively similar in size to an F24. Don't forget Multimarine's L7 or the wonderfully named Exploder 25. Malcolm Tennant 26 Çoaster all have cabins. And there are daysailers like the CC23 and the new Multi 23 that look fun. get Suurfin':D

waynemarlow

07-23-2008, 09:37 AM

Not having much luck contacting the designers, they must be on hols or busy. Anybody have a link to Eric larouge as googling him desn't come up with a link, his 23ft was a very pretty little boat with descent cabin. The ST7 looks pretty good just I would like a bigger cabin as the climes over here are not particularly hot. The Tritum is cool but doesn't have a folding mechanism ( marinas over here are bad enough to find for a mono let alone a tri )

waynemarlow

07-23-2008, 10:07 AM

Found the La Rouge design page, thanks

jamez

07-24-2008, 03:20 AM

The ST7 started out with a cuddy a bit similar in size to the smaller of the F22cabin configurations. However as the design firmed up they did away with it. Shame really IMO it would have been a good alternative to the F22 R otherwise, even if it doesn't fold in the water. Needing a folder limits your options somewhat although the L7 seems to have a workable system of telescoping fibreglass I beams that is trailerable. Kurt Hughes offers a similar arrangement with alloy tubes for his 24, but I don't know how well it works.

Hughes 24 vid
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfSQg4s_LsU

oldsailor7

09-05-2008, 09:03 PM

I can supply Buccaneer 24 trimaran plans.
Arguably the best all round 24" trimaran ever designed.

Meanz Beanz

09-08-2008, 08:36 AM

http://www.voile.org/trimaran/

:D

Even if you don't fancy the boat.

zigzag

09-13-2008, 06:59 AM

I am interested if the buc 24 plans are still avaiblable.

oldsailor7

09-13-2008, 07:28 AM

I am interested if the buc 24 plans are still avaiblable.

Yes they are. :cool:

zigzag

09-13-2008, 07:40 AM

hi old sailor, What are you asking ?and is the aka design based on cold mold as one option to hard chine?
Thanks
Barry

zigzag

09-13-2008, 08:04 AM

Dear Old sailor , Could you send me a private message re. the plans I am not a junior by the way but wish i was.
Barry

oldsailor7

09-13-2008, 08:10 AM

No cold moulding. It is multi-chine construction with some subtle curvature in the panels. Much, much simpler to build , but still very efficient. Construction method does NOT need a strongback or moulds.
Plans include full size patterns, building instructions, bill of materials and extra drawings of alternative spade rudder and suggested inexpensive mainsheet traveller.
Also Trimaraner magazine article about the build, and a booklet on building with epoxy. US$150.00, postage and PayPal fee included. :D

bruceb

11-02-2008, 08:54 PM

m interested in building or modifying my amas. I think the new spinnaker and full batten main is more than crowther designed for. Anybody have any experience with new amas?

oldsailor7

11-03-2008, 01:38 AM

m interested in building or modifying my amas. I think the new spinnaker and full batten main is more than crowther designed for. Anybody have any experience with new amas?

I don't think it is necessary to build NEW amas. But the bows can be extended to be in line with the mainhull stem.

Keeping the extended bows fair can be achieved by spacing the bulkheads further apart by 4" (100mm), forward of the fore crossbeam. Extra intercostal compression struts and an extra longeron stringer running to amidships, would provide the strength needed to resist the squeezing forces when driving hard with the extra power provided by a screacher or assymetric on a bowsprit.

There is a Green one racing very successfully in NZ with a huge increase in sail area.

JAMEZ has a very nice picture of that one, if he feels so kind as to show it.

There is also a very pretty Yellow one which has had the bows and sterns extended by simply sloping the stems more forward and the transoms more back. This has the effect of making the motion more "Silky" in choppy conditions, without adding too much wetted surface.

Gary Baigent

11-03-2008, 05:04 AM

Here is a breathed on Buccaneer 24 named Miranda (formerly Gulf Chariot) - extended in stern to 28 and the too sharp stern sections rocker (what was Crowther thinking?) filled in and faired (which lets the hull "breath" properly, greatly reduced stern wave and no transom dragging), main hull daggerboard removed and new asymmetric foils (angled at approximately 25 degrees) in floats, new underhung and balanced rudder, rotating mast and 7/8ths rig. Boat is fast and much quicker than original - could be faster with taller rig.

oldsailor7

11-03-2008, 06:59 AM

Thanks Gary. Thats the one I was talking about. A very pretty example.

Lock had the ability to design cabin tops which are pleasing to the eye ---as seen in that one. Lots of other designers seem to have great difficulty with this feature, including amateur builders who try to "Improve" the design for greater headroom or other reasons.

bruceb

11-03-2008, 08:08 AM

I see lots of good ideas on the yellow one. Thanks! I have a 36' rotating mast that works well on mine and I think extending the amas would be a good first step. I was already working on new foils. Any other ideas would be welcome, I am in the US and there are just a few 24s still sailing that I have found. Bruce

jamez

11-03-2008, 03:44 PM

Hi there PM. Here are the pictures of the big-rigged B24. The rig has since been modifed to cant to windward and the forestay moved forward.

While looking for these pics I came across pics of a 26' tri that had its main hull based on an old surfboat. This one of the nicest such conversions I've seen. if you look at the floats they seem to be very similar to B24 in shape.

Gary Baigent

11-03-2008, 03:53 PM

Miranda is the ex-Capricorn - not as I had it Gulf Chariot. I think Gulf Chariot is now Sam Tucker's over rigged, mean, green machine seen above.

Gary Baigent

11-03-2008, 06:20 PM

apologies, I had it right the first time - Miranda= Gulf Chariot and Sam's Greenie = Capricorn

bruceb

11-04-2008, 10:05 AM

Any idea how the foils in the amas effect tacking? I am sure they are more efficient, but I would hate to lose the Buc's ease of handing. Losing the centerboard trunk would be great- it leaks. (it is 32 years old)

Gary Baigent

11-04-2008, 03:13 PM

Tacks just fine, even easier than with the original single main hull board. The stretched Buccaneer with its way better underhung and balanced rudder design also improves helming. In fact before the modifications, tacking with Miranda was terrible with savage weather helm - in that you had to hold the helm over with one leg (or got someone else in the cockpit to do so) while you sheeted in the headsail and main on the new tack - otherwise if you didn't keep pressure there, it would immediately centre with the boat twisting up head to wind ..... that doesn't happen anymore. Another plus is that the foils make the boat track better, less twitchy, and even though they are set at a fairly shallow angle, there is still considerable lift generated - which keeps the leeward float up. Jpeg of Miranda and Flash Harry

oldsailor7

11-04-2008, 05:40 PM

In fact before the modifications, tacking with Miranda was terrible with savage weather helm - in that you had to hold the helm over with one leg (or got someone else in the cockpit to do so) while you sheeted in the headsail and main on the new tack - otherwise if you didn't keep pressure there, it would immediately centre with the boat twisting up head to wind .....

I find that curious, because my B24 was light on the tiller and tacked on a dime. I suggest the excessive weather helm was caused by the mast being raked too far aft.
However I agree about the rudder-- and the plans I have show an alternate balanced spade rudder, which was subsequently made standard on the B28.

bruceb

11-04-2008, 09:19 PM

I really appreciate the information. I know I have gotten off track on the thread but thanks. The buc 24 is the most fun sailing I have had in a long time. It is wooden, but mine is 32 years old, been in the water most of it, and really has had very few problems. I am an old former boat dealer in the southern US and I have had just as many problems with old glass boats, and they are a lot harder to repair. The build time for a 24 is about 500-700 hrs, and about twice that for all the glass designs I have seen. I am just going to keep up-dating my boat, it is fun and much less expensive. I am planing on replacing my rudder also. The previous owner has hung the rudder on a sloping transom and it tries to over-steer when you push it off center. The boat is nicely balanced though, I have a taller rig with a shorter (9.5feet) boom that probably helps. Gary, what sort of foil profiles did you use?

Gary Baigent

11-04-2008, 10:06 PM

A break from US elections, go Obama.
Miranda is not my boat (owned by Malcolm Cheadle, had it for a couple of decades) but I had some influence in the changes. The angled foils are just larger versions of those on 6x6 metre Flash Harry: float dagger asymmetric foils which are relatively small (305 x 39mm chord to thickness and based on NACA65-412 and only a metre long overall with 300mm bury through the floats) - because I wanted a boat that would lift off only in stronger winds (12-14 knots) and in lighter conditions the foils, being small, would not drag too much. The float foils are set at 40 degrees and at 3 degrees angle of attack and they slope forward a few degrees to try and halt cavitation when passing through waves, The rudder blade is 250 x 32mm and based on NACA 64012, rudder draws 700mm below waterline.
On Miranda the foils are set at zero angle of attack - there is no inverted T section on the rudder - it is a foil stabilized tri, not a flyer. If you want her exact foil measurements I can post them later.
Old sailor, you can see in the jpeg that Miranda's rig is dead vertical, no aft rake - the tri is not quite floating in the image, sitting on its cradle.

bruceb

11-05-2008, 10:03 AM

The US has made a start towards recovery- I hope we can stay on track. Enough politics, lets build fast boats. Gary, I would like to see the foil details. Light air performance is really important on the US east coast and on the lake I race on, (saillanier.com) so low drag and good pointing is more important than top speed. We rarely get enough wind to "fly" except in storms. Also, how far forward did the transom re-fairing start. Our lake is really low due to a major drought so I am working on my boat this winter. My first project is trying to make it fold/disassemble easier.
I think I like making sawdust.

Gary Baigent

11-05-2008, 04:42 PM

Bruce
Those dimensions for Flash Harry's foil would be fine for your tri, just make the foil longer to suit your float depths - if you make them too long, you can easily shorten them. The important thing is to lay plenty of unidirectional carbon through the hard spot area (where the foils exit their cases).
The hull extension fairing on Miranda required plenty of foam because the stern extension began a little aft of the deepest rocker point on the main hull (which is a little aft of a midships) - foam was just epoxied on in blocks, then faired with long boards and later glassed, filled and faired yet again. The rudder was shifted further aft and setup like a daggerboard in its case - so it can be easily removed. Miranda has a shorter second rudder for sailing in shallow water.
You can see in the jpeg the angle of the foil with the boat horizontal - but the B24 has quite an angle of dihedral when sailing with the windward float quite high and the boat leaning over so the leeward foil works at a greater angle, approx 25 degrees - a compromise between lifting and still providing lateral stability. Miranda is a high pointing boat.

bruceb

11-06-2008, 11:34 AM

Thanks Gary. How does the crew feel about adjusting them under sail? :) It looks like the board leading edge is just aft of the crossbeam. Would you change anything, or is that about right? I think I am going ahead with putting the boards in the floats this winter. Are the floats extended forward any?

Gary Baigent

11-06-2008, 04:06 PM

You can leave both foils down because the tip area of the windward one just skims the water surface, only fractional drag - but in light weather it is no problem to lift the windward one. If you are going to tack, yes, get the windward one down first, The foil position in the float needs to be a little ahead of the hull balance point, you want the forward part of the float to be lifted, not the after sections - otherwise you'll stick the nose in. Miranda has aft extensions on the floats, none forward.

oldsailor7

11-06-2008, 04:12 PM

Thanks Gary. How does the crew feel about adjusting them under sail? :)

I had my first Trimaran with outboard daggers in the floats in 1964.

Never again. :eek:

Fine in flat water and fair weather, but dangerous on a filthy black night, with the rain lashing, the waves crashing and the wind howling.

Do you really fancy going right out to the outboard edge of the craft in such conditions. But if you dont, the risk of severe strucural damage is high.

Classic example is Groupama 3.

Bin there --done that. :cool:

Gary Baigent

11-06-2008, 05:15 PM

In crappy black weather, leave them both down, in fact leave them down all the time - it is only in very light conditions when the fractional drag from the flying windward dagger might trouble the most paranoid of competitive sailors, that the windward one could be lifted so the tip flies clear.
I'm pretty sure Groupama 3's huge curved foils are not lifted by some jokers toddling out there up to windward and hoisting them by hand. That is not the reason they got into trouble. I thought it was from heavy breaking waves smashing against the float - not a lot you can do about that in such conditions, a trimaran/multihull configuration problem.

bruceb

11-06-2008, 06:22 PM

I will probably spend the dark nights on someone else's bigger boat, but it is nice to know that disaster shouldn't strike because the boards are left down. I don't think I want to go out there in a blow. I notice in most of the photos that the crossbeams don't have much "flex". Mine are down from the joint out a couple of degrees at least- particularly the forward one. It puts the floats noticeably bow down but the boat doesn't heel as much. I just used the settings that the previous owner had used. (my forward water stays have a turnbuckle) Any thoughts?

Gary Baigent

11-07-2008, 02:50 AM

Actually Miranda carries the floats bow down a bit too - but if you fit foils that is no worry as they rectify the nose down attitude. You'll hear armchair admirals say that if you nose down a steep wave, the foils will provide negative lift and bury you even further to the point of an end over - I've never experienced this, in fact the foils keep the overpowered float up and reduce the expert's capsize fantasy. Not saying it couldn't happen if you drop out of a huge, tumbling wave front surf - but in such conditions you're in deep pooh anyway, foils or no foils.

bruceb

11-07-2008, 09:25 AM

There is a wave out there bigger than any boat- I guess I will take my chances. I am concerned about my ability to get the board trunk installed at the right angle- I am not sure what part of the float to use as a base line. I have installed boards and keels on center line but this is different.

bruceb

11-07-2008, 09:35 AM

Gary Baigent

11-07-2008, 03:55 PM

Fitting foils is no big deal Bruce - although the directions here make it sound more complicated that what it is. Run and stake tight lines, one from the main hull bow to middle of stern, another from float bow to stern (you'll have to use a plumb bob to get the positions on ground). then measure at right angles from hull to float lines at the position of your foils and there you have the measuring points. You have to cut slightly wider holes in your floats for the foils and their (strongly constructed) cases, slot them in dropping the foil to touch ground (it will be a metre or so on the ground towards main hull) measure on the ground the leading and trailing foil edge positions and check and recheck alignment, then when you are satisfied, epoxy the cases in. By the way, on angled towards main hull foils, the higher curved faces of the foils are positioned facing TOWARDS the main hull, the flatter surfaced areas TOWARDS the float, this is a basic that some people are unsure about, you don't want to mount them upside down.
Although Miranda has her foils set at zero angle of attack, I would suggest 2 degrees toe in (you might as well make full use of the lift and less drag of asymmetrical foils) then you will really climb to windward. If you look at the jpegs of Miranda you'll see that the foils exit slightly inward of the float keelson, means you don't have to cut timber, just ply. Any greater angle you set the foils through floats will make this position higher, doesn't matter, although the closer you are to the float keel the better, less chance of aeration. Remember the greater angle, the less canterlever support area there is for the foil cases - and also the more difficult it is when sailing to lean out and physically fit or lift foils - Miranda's setup is a good compromise.
.

RHP

11-07-2008, 04:11 PM

oldsailor7

11-07-2008, 08:51 PM

Oldsailor, were your boards vertical or angled in your tri? I have never sailed on a boat with angled boards, but the lift they give seems to change the whole dynamics. Since I am on the other end of the world, news takes awhile to get here- has anything been determined as to why Groupama broke up? I know the bow folded but not much else.

Last question first.

Groupama 3 broke its forward crossbeam right at he point where it enters the deck of the port outrigger.
Final analysis was that the skin of the outrigger failed in fatigue due to the continuous stress reversals between the side loadings on the end of the crossarm and the torsional loadings provided by the lifting daggerboard, which was situated right behind the crossarm junction.

It is impossible to calculate these structural forces because the sea doesn't go by the book.

Lock Crowther told me that to be safe, after the loss of his first successful ocean racing trimaran, he took his initial stress calculations and then increased them by a factor of 6, to be on the safe side.

This can be over done of course, which will result in a structure which is too heavy.

The Buccaneer 24 was Locks most successful design in terms of numbers of plans sold. He set out to design the simplest, yet best performing small CRUISING trimaran, based on the idea of three sheets of plywood butted end to end. The result was a pleasing looking boat which could be amateur built very quickly, in a small space, at minimum cost.

I am not one for "guilding the lilly". If I were to build a B24 again I would change nothing except extending the bows of the floats to be level with the mainhull bow, the underslung rudder option, and a more modern rig. with prodder and furlers on the forward stays.
On further thinking I would build the cabin with the MK2 cabin length, and the Mk1 cabin width in order to get the narrower sheeting angles so essential to good windward performance. I would also increase the aspect ratio of the centreboard with a rectangular planform and area of 2% of the projected sailplan.

AND

I would paint it April Yellow. LOL.!!!

bruceb

11-08-2008, 10:44 AM

RHP, I think I am responsible for diverting the thread- as a former boat dealer I agree on buying used if at all possible. Far better value and you are sailing years quicker. Gary, I think you have answered all my questions, thanks! I will start measuring next week. Oldsailor, I didn't know there are two versions. The plan set (151) my boat was built from dates to about 1974, the inboard rudder is not shown. The cabin was removed from my boat- I have a 9' open cockpit, great for racing in the summer, but I will probably put a cabin back on some time in the future. Do your plans show both versions? I am not quite sure how I can fit the cabin and still be able to drop my mast easily, it sits on a ball on the cross beam. What is a "prodder"? I have a taller rotating mast, roller furling jibs and assymetric spinnakers, just what every "cruising" boat needs. :)

oldsailor7

11-09-2008, 01:39 AM

BRUCE.
If you put the cabin back on in accordance with the plans, the mast sits on top of the cabin , just as you have it now. It is supported by a 4 3/4" x 2 3/4" compression strut in the cabin. You can leave the mast as it is and lengthen the shroud wires, or shorten the mast to suit.

A prodder is just a newfangled name for a bowsprit. LOL.!

If anyone would like a study plan of the B24 I can supply one gratis if you just send me your postal address.

PM me if interested.

bruceb

11-09-2008, 10:48 AM

Ha! I learned something new- I have a retractable;) prodder. Carbonfiber too. I got out the plans and looked at the strut. I think something like that will work with a little rework. There is a lot of forward horizontal load when I am stepping the mast that I will have to account for. I have to do something new, my white boat looks so dull after seeing the pictures of Miranda.

waynemarlow

11-09-2008, 01:29 PM

Wayne, I always favour buying secondhand to save money and get on the water without delay. Maybe I'm poor or lazy. Maybe both.

I cant work out whether you said you want a lightweight flyer or whether the thread just progressed that way however I have always like the Telstar 26 which are freely available around the UK from rebuild candidates (I know 2 worn out ones that need complete refurbishment) through to ready refurbed and all between.

I certainly do agree on the second hand route but so far have found nothing that really jingles my bells. I probably would say that racing and lightweight would be higher priorities than cruising, which sort of eliminates the Telstar and somewhat the Buccaneer. The ST7 is very nice if it had a small cabin big enough for overnight stays, the F28 is very very nice but is expensive to build and now getting a little dated in looks.

bruceb

11-10-2008, 09:27 PM

Gary, I have plotted the foil shapes, and they look sort of fat? Sort of like the wing profile on my old piper airplane- lots of lift, but a lot of drag when you were trying to go fast. I am just learning to use xfoil and I don't have any experience with assymmetric boat foils. Maybe they are correct. The shape of the current offshore racing multi's foils seems to be very well kept secrets. Any thoughts?

Gary Baigent

11-11-2008, 01:38 AM

If you look at the earlier posted jpeg of the asymmetric foil, you’ll that is a 12 % thickness to chord ratio - in my opinion not a bad compromise foil for both high and low speed performance. Also at that thickness you can grind out two shallow scoops a couple of feet long both sides of the thickest section in the hard spot area (where the foils exit their cases) and fill the scoops with layers of uni directional carbon. Remember most of your boat’s weight will be resting/leaning on that small area when you are foiling hard in waves and a fresh wind. You need some meat in there. So far, although my foils are low technology: strip planked wood, carbon reinforcing, sheathed in box weave glass/bog for fairing, I haven’t broken any from sailing loads. This is not to say I haven’t wrecked a couple (and cases) from slamming into sunken reefs at high speed.
If you prefer to go to symmetric foils, keep them at or near 12% too. But asymmetric shapes are superior. However there is another simple-to-construct shape and that is ogival foils: an arc of a circle shape in the top section and completely flat underneath, with the leading and trailing edges being very sharp points. The Grogono brothers used such foils on their famous Icarus/Tornado cats – and they worked extremely well. They were also very fine, (at a guess 6-7%) and built in metal with a solid beam inside at the middle and thickest section point. You could easily built them in wood (but a bit thicker) with carbon/glass etc.

bruceb

11-11-2008, 09:33 AM

Gary, I think I am going to make two different boards and see which I like best. Maybe one 10-12% asymmetric and the other like the tornado board. I can then make a mold of the better board. Thanks for the advice. Sailing in the eastern US, ground contact is a matter of when, not if. I really like getting the dagger out of the main hull, damaging the float is a lot less of a disaster. I have dingy airbags stuffed everywhere for a back up. I am making my cases "adaptable" with removable shim strips, it makes the boards easier to slide also. This should be interesting, I will report back in about March with some pics and results. Bruce

waynemarlow

11-11-2008, 01:01 PM

Dagger boards need to be thought through just a tad more than putting enough carbon in to not break. In fact you do need them to break if you hit an obstacle with them and that means sufficient strength in the case to hull areas just behind the bottom edge and the front edge at the top. Too much strength in the board will seriously compromise the hull and you are far better to break the board and sail on without, than punching a hole in the hull.

Also nothing is worse to repair than the case ( from experiance of breaking a board or two ) and around it as it inevitably means replacing the whole case ( surprising how a screwdriver in the appropriate place can delaminate the resin sufficient to get a whole case out without damaging the hull ) or cutting big holes in the boat to get to the case. :cool:

Gary Baigent

11-11-2008, 03:42 PM

Wayne, we are talking about lifting foils here, not conventional daggerboards, loads are much higher - and anything is going to break slamming into sunken rock at 20 knots, don't care how heavily you have constructed boards or foils.

bruceb

11-11-2008, 11:05 PM

oldsailor7

11-15-2008, 05:56 AM

I have navigated by "touch" all to many times, and have rebuilt several trunks because of it. The forward upper part of the trunk usually splits, builders seem to re-enforce the trunk to hull joint but forget the upper part. The glass/foam production boats are often not put together as well as the wooden ones I have seen. I build them strong, add crush blocks, and hope for the best. It is after all a very thin boat that goes really fast, sometimes it is going to get damaged. That is another good reason to sail a tri- a pontoon boat with a spare hull.

That is why a pivoting centreboard is the best of all worlds,--for a Trimaran.

It can be fitted in the main hull and concealed in the cabin furniture. The control lines can be fed up a PVC tube immediatly behind he mast foot and led back to the cocpit, to nylon jam cleats. Upon going aground whilst under way the "Down" line simply pulls out of the jam cleat and the board pivots back without damage. Control from the cockpit is safe and convenient, and when the board is fully up the centreboards slot is closed with a neoprene seal. It does it's job of resisting leeway without the extra induced drag of having to produce a vertical lift component, as in a canted board.

In lifting foils, this induced drag is vastly more than compensated for by the reduction in form and skin friction drag of the hull(s) being lifted out of the water. (Ask Doug Lord).

With stabilising foils this doesn't happen. The hulls still stay in the water and so the extra induced drag of the canted foils actually SLOWS the boat unless they are very carefully, and mathematically designed.

My first experience with pivoting centreboards was on Dave Greens Kraken 40, "Ringo". The board in my Buccaneer 28 was an improvement of this feature and was a joy to operate. The board could be adjusted to any angle to balance out the helm on any point of sail and it could be set forward over centre to put the boat in a hove to mode for lunch, or on the starting line before a race.

Way to Go.

bruceb

11-15-2008, 11:04 AM

I agree a centerboard is the safest and most practical in most boats, but the trunk does take up some space. A good gasket does help with the slot drag. I am just finishing a long thin dagger that fits the stock trunk with filler blocks fore and aft. It can be "raked" fore and aft about 15 degrees so it gives me something to tune with. If I hit something hard it will do lots of damage somewhere, but I did not build it too heavy. I still think I am going to put the angled trunks in the floats, I need to do some rot repair/inspection in the beam saddles and the trunks are not that heavy. I can keep foam filler plugs in which ever trunks I am not using. They will give me something to play with. What thickness ply were your boats built of? Mine and most surviving 24s here are 1/4 inch fir- a little heavy but durable. Some were glassed also, mine is not, does not seem to have been a problem. All the water/rot damage on any that I have seen came from rain water. We have a tough climate for boats here, very hot summers and freezing winters. It opens up foam/glass decks as well as wooden boats. The wood is easier to repair. Bruce

oldsailor7

11-15-2008, 04:56 PM

Very interesting Bruce. :)

My first four Trimarans were built and sailed in Canada where the water is not salty.
The first two were made of 1/4" Douglas Fir/Oregon). They rotted out quickly in the fresh water.

My next two were made from Samba Mahogany 3 ply (Buc 24), and Brunzeel mahogany 5 ply (Buc 28) and I had no rot problems with these.

Douglas Fir/Oregon ply is OK in salt water, except --as you pointed out--for rainwater lying in the bilges. It is also heavier.

If I was building any of these types of multihull again I would use Gaboon ply. Lovely stuff.

Gary Baigent

11-15-2008, 08:33 PM

Miranda's original main hull board and case was a real pain - there was a mickey mouse canvas drawstring arrangement to keep the water from spraying out at speed - never worked, soaked the interior. Also by removing the assembly much more room was produced in main hull. The foil/boards in the floats would give less drag than the original setup (because they are better designed, asymmetric and have the ability of raising or lowering to alter wetted surface area without changing the balance of the boat).
I'm not bagging Lock (thought his Kraken boats were very aesthetic plus being good performers - K40 Krisis was top boat here in the old days) BUT ..... there were some dumb design solutions on the B24. The worst was the savage turn in the after sections rocker - which made the boat sail like it was a heavy displacement keelboat, dragging a very ugly stern wave. If you really want to increase performance, that is what I would do first (extend and fair the after underwater sections). Miranda just skimmed along effortlessly after modifications.
A point about centreboards: they drag (because of their long slot and difficulty of sealing same .... and they can jamb .... and to clear mud, sand or marine growth buildup, you have to disassemble case top, pivot pin, lift out board etc. Not a problem with daggers, easily cleaned. The big plus is the dagger is a far superior foil shape compared to a swing board.
jpeg gives you a better view of foil/board angles.

oldsailor7

11-15-2008, 11:07 PM

Gary, I agree with a lot of what you said.

I was not keen on theB24's original board box and location. I built mine with a vertical daggerboard with a rectangular planform. It had a fibreglass closure on the bottom which closly followed the foil shape of the board which eliminated turbulence in the box. The box, being vertical, removed the top of the box away from the neat little galley and its athwartships supports formed a nice seat for two---or the galley occupant to sit on. It was upholstered and when the board was fully down the board cap sealed the top of the box. I admit the rectangular planform was not as efficient as an elliptical one would have been, but the passing Dolphins never noticed the difference. :D

As for the "Savage turn in the after sections rocker", I measured the angle of the tangent to the curve of the buttocks, and it came to 10 deg. Twice the recommended maximum of 5 degs. Locks reason for that was to get enough buoyancy in the after section to support the weight of crew in the cockpit. To reduce the negative effect of this he made the aft sections more Veed and raised the transom so that (for normal use) it didn't drag in the water. this was a compromise he made to achieve his goal for the overall design of the B24. You couldn't do that with todays wide flat Trimaran tail sections.
As I said earlier:-
"The Buccaneer 24 was Locks most successful design in terms of numbers of plans sold. He set out to design the simplest, yet best performing small CRUISING trimaran, based on the idea of three sheets of plywood butted end to end. The result was a pleasing looking boat which could be amateur built very quickly, in a small space, at minimum cost."

I understand the main reason for extending Mirandas stern sections was because the two big heavy guys sitting right at the back caused the transom to drag excessively.

Nevertheless I agree that if anyone is willing to make the changes, the stretched stern is a good idea and is also very pleasing to the eye.

Regarding the pivoting centreboard, you said:-
"The big plus is the dagger is a far superior foil shape compared to a swing board."

I don't agree with that.
A pivoting centreboard is (should be) made with the optimum section when it is in the fully down mode. IE:- Sailing to windward. As the board is progressively tilted back, the effective section becoms a finer thickness to chord ratio, reducing the form drag, and, since the angle of leeway will be less on a more downwind heading, the induced drag will be reduced too. Also since a large part of the board is now retracted the skin friction drag is reduced as well. A win-win situation all round.
All the other disadvantages you state are eliminated by a properly installed neoprene seal over the bottom slot.

As for leaving the boards fully down all the time. :eek:

I remember on an aforementioned "Filthy black night " in the Summerville race on Lake Ontario, two monohulls lost their masts, three lost their rudders, but a home designed home built plywood 40' Catamaran--which had both of its daggerboads fully down, broke up and SANK when one of the boards tore the Starboard hull apart.

Nuff Said.

Gary Baigent

11-16-2008, 12:12 AM

Right oldsailor, the pivoting board on the Tornado works pretty well (understatement) ... BUT I'm sure if Rodney March was asked to re-update that excellent design (which is still competitive, even better, with many of the latest cats) he would put highly refined daggers into the platform. Yer can't convince me otherwise, mate, they're just better. The only advantage a pivoting board has is when you touch bottom ..... and everywhere else where it is important, the dagger is superior.
My point of leaving both foils down on a tri with dihedral, is that only one foil/board is deeply immersed - I agree in crappy conditions on a cat, both boards fully down in heavy seas is going to load them up. In a perfect world you would lift them halfway or so - but I can understand people too frightened to move from the cockpit in inclement conditions.
A little point about crew position on Miranda, we try to sail, even with the extended stern, with the crew sitting as far forward in the cockpit as possible.
Just remembered an incident which happened before we altered Miranda - returning from Te Kouma beam reaching across the Firth of Thames in a 20 knot cold southerly, we crossed the 15 nautical miles in an hour, but many times I could feel steerage disappear - and had to keep the tiller absolutely centred, with no movement until the foam and aeration disappeared and steering returned. That convinced Malcolm to begin the B24bis.

oldsailor7

11-16-2008, 02:42 AM

Got to give it to you Gary.

Miranda is a stunning looking boat.

Multis rule. :cool:

bruceb

11-16-2008, 02:54 PM

Thanks for the Miranda pic, Gary, there is much to learn from that boat. You and Oldsailor have a lot more experience in larger multis than I do, but I think we are all going in the same direction. My boat was built in Canada in 74-76, but it spent most of its life so far on the Chesapeake in salt water and had very little rot. From the remains of the daggerboard it came with, it had numerous encounters with the bottom. Good light marine ply is readily available now, and I would not use anything else for changes/repairs. It is not even very much more expensive than fir. I will have to be careful on all counts as long as I am sailing mostly in thin fresh or saltwater. One of my friends was in a long distance race in a light beach cat, (coastal) going fast, and sailed over a large manta ray- he had his boards up, the boat behind him did not, and it basicly exploded. We don't know what happened to the ray. I do have lots of airbags, I don't want to have to use them, but at least I should be able to salvage the pieces if I hit something:( I will keep in mind the aft extension, I know I have noticed a large wave following me around- much more than I would have expected. I have usually moved out on the tramp in those conditions, so it isn't so much my rearend dragging:), and my crew is light and forward. (and she would be greatly offended if we said her weight was causing the wave- I might be single-handing) Bruce

oldsailor7

11-19-2008, 05:18 AM

[Quote] "My boat was built in Canada in 74-76, [Quote}.

Bruce, whereabouts in Canada was your B24 built and sailed. I know of four which were built in the Toronto area during that period. I might even know the boat. :eek:

bruceb

11-19-2008, 10:29 AM

Oldsailor, I am not sure of the builder, the boat was owned in 1984 by an H William Snyders of Mississauga,Ontario, who sold it at that time. It is hull #151 and was built from plans purchased from Canadian Multihull Services, Mr Snyders may have been the builder, but my records do not show that. All of the construction was very well done, almost production quality, and followed the plans exactly. It was epoxy coated in and out, but not glassed. The fittings/crossbars seem to be as supplied by CMS. The mast has been replaced by a rotating one from a Stiletto 27 cat. I would be very interested in learning more of the boat's history. I think it is a great boat. Bruce

Chris Ostlind

11-19-2008, 01:15 PM

If you look at the earlier posted jpeg of the asymmetric foil, you’ll that is a 12 % thickness to chord ratio - in my opinion not a bad compromise foil for both high and low speed performance. Also at that thickness you can grind out two shallow scoops a couple of feet long both sides of the thickest section in the hard spot area (where the foils exit their cases) and fill the scoops with layers of uni directional carbon. Remember most of your boat’s weight will be resting/leaning on that small area when you are foiling hard in waves and a fresh wind. You need some meat in there. So far, although my foils are low technology: strip planked wood, carbon reinforcing, sheathed in box weave glass/bog for fairing, I haven’t broken any from sailing loads....
If you prefer to go to symmetric foils, keep them at or near 12% too. But asymmetric shapes are superior.

Below is a photo of the exit opening for the banana lifting foil on Coville's ORMA60 while sitting in the shop. I got to crawl all over this boat while I was in France in September and found this component of the design to be very interesting. Obviously, this section is derived for max lift at the operating speeds of the O60 potential, so your needs may vary considerably.

I just love this whole thread, you guys, there is so much collected knowledge on this topic, that it is truly fun to read each time one of you guys posts a response.

bruceb

11-19-2008, 02:04 PM

Chris, thanks for the photo, I think I am convinced- Mine will be 12%. It looks like it is set at a relatively high angle of attack also. I will be lucky to go half as fast as an ORMA60:) , but the dynamics should be the same. Coville's have to work in light air also. Bruce

oldsailor7

11-19-2008, 07:07 PM

Bruce.

I remember Bill Snyders well. He was a member of the Toronto Multihull Cruising Club. That would be the mid 1970's.

He did indeed do a good job of building his B24. He bought the crossbeam and spar kit from CMS, and the Bote-Cote epoxy he used to build it. He may have also bought the CMS sails, although I am not sure about that.

The Bote-Cote system called for two coats of epoxy on the inside and three coats on the outside, with fibreglass on the keel and chine seams only. They claimed that if a wooden boat was built and totally encapsulated in Bote-Cote, it would increase the life of the boat by a factor of five. :cool:

Your experience seems to bear that out.

bruceb

11-20-2008, 10:33 AM

Thanks Oldsailor, Bill must have been very through in coating the boat. The only rot has been in places where metal penetrated and leaks developed over the years. Even then, the next part glued was usually protected by the epoxy glue line. This winter I am going over the whole boat very carefully and resealing/repairing any suspect parts. So far, I have a very short list. I wonder what the expected life is?:) Most of the ply and framing looks almost new. I know the boat was kept in the water most of the time from 1984 to 2008- snow and ice in the winter, hot sun in the summer, and hungry marine creatures on the bottom- it has done very well. Bruce

jamez

11-21-2008, 11:43 PM

heres a short clip from a recent yacht race in Auckland. You can see the green B 24 about half way through, moving very nicely.....

http://nz.youtube.com/watch?v=TALqp16Lu8U

bruceb

11-22-2008, 10:26 AM

It looks fast in those conditions, thanks for the video. It must be one of the older boats in that fleet. Does it use running backstays with the masthead chute? I have added the masthead halyard, but I haven't tried it yet. Bruce

jamez

11-22-2008, 01:11 PM

Yes it does use masthead runners. I understand the boat was built in 1970 - light - its skinned in 4mm ply. The current owner rebuilt it from a basketcase. Other than the big rig a major change was converting to wooden box beams, permanently mounted. Beam is now 6 metres, a little more than standard. Its does very well against the rest of the (generally longer) fleet in the right conditions.

tspeer

11-22-2008, 02:07 PM

... A good gasket does help with the slot drag. ...

Speaking of good gaskets, do you have a good centerboard gasket approach for a boat that lives in the water?

The plans for my boat call for a gasket made of a material like the belts at supermarket checkout counters. The gasket that was on the boat had several coats of bottom paint on it and was so stiff that it really wasn't flexible at all. It was permanently formed in the open position and actually constituted a scoop at the aft end when the board was down. It was so ugly, I figured it was causing more drag than it saved, and I simply had it removed. There is definitely recirculation behind the board, evident by the pressure against the aft end of the cap to the CB trunk that causes a tendency to leak there. I'm going to haul out this winter for a bunch of other hull repairs, so a CB gasket would be a good thing to add to the job list.

Chris Ostlind

11-22-2008, 02:37 PM

F-boat driver, Sigi Stiemer in B.C. can help you out with photos of the work he did on his F31 before he sold it. I believe he used the standard stuff for the task out of Annapolis Performance Sailing products and also other suppliers.

http://www.apsltd.com/Tree/d312000/e309658.asp

The stuff comes in widths up to 6" and is sold as continuous lengths priced by the foot.

There are also all kinds of urethane compounds with varying degrees of flexibility according to your needs. Most plastic suppliers can show you samples and thicknesses.

oldsailor7

11-22-2008, 05:28 PM

I agree with Chris.
Definitely don't use rubber belting. It age hardens and becomes useless.

bruceb

11-23-2008, 12:59 PM

I have also used the seals from APS and some slightly thicker material I got locally. Both worked fine for at least 3 years. I fit mine with a definite positive "V" outwards, and test it with a pressure hose. If the water pressure blows it back in, it will also happen under sail. You can't just put a flat piece on and slit it unless it is a tightly fitted board. Bruce

bruceb

11-23-2008, 01:16 PM

Jamez, Do you know the construction details/thickness of the wooden box beams, and does it still use waterstays with them? I have wondered if I could save some weight there, my boat must be 200-300lbs heavier than one built of 4mm light ply. Mine is rugged, but that one seems to be holding together just fine, and going fast too. Doesn't it also have the floats extended forward? Bruce

jamez

11-23-2008, 01:46 PM

Hi Bruce, I don't know what it weighs empty, but with all equipment less sails (how they get weighed here for racing) it came in about 750 kg (or about 1600 lb's). Re. the beams there are no water stays. I'll find out the scantlings from the owner.

bruceb

11-26-2008, 10:15 AM

Jamez, I have not weighed my boat, but from measuring the water line I think it is about the same, maybe even a little lighter. I am very curious now, I wonder where the difference is. I will weigh it when I re-launch next spring. I don't carry much equipment, and I don't have a cabin, which might save a little weight. I am interested in the wood beams if you get a chance to ask. Thanks, bruce

tatoski

11-26-2008, 10:59 PM

Oldsailor, do you still have plans for the Bucaneer 24? I am looking for trimaran plans using wood and epoxy/glass. I've read about the boat mostly in this forum and looks like it will fit me. I am currently a monohull sailor sailing my bateau Vagabond plus in southern Luzon, Philippines and in Taal lake south of Manila and I feel I want to build a multi-hull. I am also considering Kendrick's scarab 67 or 22 but sourcing of foam cores might be a problem.

Do you have specifications of the Bucaneer 24? Where can I get hold of it. Been searching on the net and no luck.

I have just signed up and I think this is a great forum. Thanks guys!

tatoski

oldsailor7

11-26-2008, 11:26 PM

Oldsailor, do you still have plans for the Bucaneer 24? I am looking for trimaran plans using wood and epoxy/glass. I've read about the boat mostly in this forum and looks like it will fit me.
Do you have specifications of the Bucaneer 24? Where can I get hold of it. Been searching on the net and no luck.tatoski

Yes the plans are available, and if you contact me by PM I will send you some information.

Cheers. Oldsailor.:D

oldsailor7

11-27-2008, 02:40 AM

Mike Waters - NA, is a small trimaran enthusiast from way back and has this to say about the B 24.

The Buccaneer 24' is a clever demountable design.. needs updating a bit by lengthening the main hull to flatten the buttocks and lengthening the amas to come level with the man bow. All easily done and 'Old Sailor' has the plans. Photo of two on the www.smalltrimarans.com site

If you click on that URL and scroll down to item 8, you will come across a wealth of info and some very nice pics of the two Buccaneer 24's.

Just follow the links.

jamez

11-27-2008, 11:08 AM

Thanks for the link to that blog OS7. Very interesting site.

Bruce, the beams are basically a 4 mm ply box glassed over. I've emailed the URL of this thread to the owner, so there may be some more specific info soon.

here is an old clip of the boat back when it was first re-launched. You can get a good idea of the beams without the nets in the way.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-lgC4WBk6Y

bruceb

11-27-2008, 12:47 PM

Samnz

11-27-2008, 04:47 PM

The Green Death Trap?? Was that from anticipation or experience? (Or the crew's opinion) Very good details in the video, it answers several of my questions. Has there ever been a direct comparison between Miranda and Capricorn? Bruce

I own the green death trap (Capricorn), they called it that because I started racing it before I got tramps and the boom was very sharp....

and everytime I raced the rudder or mast broke!

There has been no direct comparision between the two most modified Auckland based Bucc 24s as the owner of the Miranda stopped racing before I started, however it is a general agreement that my taller canting rig and new sails would give the (non foiled) Capricorn a significant speed advantage except maybe in over 20 knots on a 2 sail reach when the Mirandas foils and added waterline could give it a slight edge.

Gary speaks about bucc 24s transom needing modification... this in only a problem at around 7 to 9 knots boat speed as below that it is at hull speed and above that is is flying clear, or at least planing.

The crew and helmsman always sit on the float near the chainplates except downwind in over 15 knots breeze.

The beams were going to be 4mm box but we thought they might break so we added another layer of 4mm ply top and bottom so its now 8mm with 4mm sides, with one layer of 10oz glass boatcloth. Forward beam is about 200mm by 200mm aft one 200mm by 100mm. They seem pretty stiff, a lot stiffer than the original (horrible) configuration, allthough there is no ability to fold this wasnt nessary for me anyhow. I would be happy to supply cut files and the attachment details for these beams.

In the last clip there was a lot of bow down on port gybe even when not fully powered up, we figured out this was caused by the outboard bracket fairing hitting the water, it got ripped of in the last race!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jc2HGfIAAz4

oldsailor7

11-27-2008, 05:26 PM

Great Video.

There don't appear to be any changes to the basic B 24 configuration except the beams, prodder and taller rig.

Admittedly the ride gets bumpy at 18 kts, but lets face it, 18 kts in a small multihull is frightenly fast.

Lock designed the B24 with a waterline L:B ratio of 8:1, low by modern standards. However that was his trade off between carrying capacity and wetted surface. This gives very good light wind performance without having to worry too much about the weight of the crew. After all Lock designed this tri as a fast cruiser, not an all out racing boat. It just turned out to be an inexpensive all rounder.

Very light cats, (like Richards Woods "Gwahir" for instance) can use an L:B ratio of 15:1 , which enables smoother high speeds and also good light wind performance providing the crew and equipment weight is kept down to a minimum. This boat was designed purely for sailing in the late "Micro Multihull" racing class, and thus had limited appeal.

For those who want to do it, lenghtening the stern section is best done during construction by simply sloping the transom back by two feet, flattening out the buttocks, and using the alternate spade rudder. It's not necessary to stretch it out to 28 ft as in "Miranda". Don't forget that added structure also adds more weight and wetted surface. There is a trade off here. As Mr Cessna said ---"Simplicate and add less weight". :cool:

oldsailor7

11-27-2008, 05:50 PM

bruceb

11-27-2008, 10:00 PM

Samnz

11-28-2008, 03:22 AM

In that last video it was very noticeable how the bow threw up water all over the front of the boat at speed in waves.

On my B24 I ran a perforated plywood deck from the ends of the side walkway, forward to the base of the bow pulpit. This did not affect the performance of the boat ---but made it a whole lot drier, and safer to work on the foredeck. A simple mod. :D

Its an interesting idea, I have just added some zigzagged cord to a bit of plastic coated dynex to give the crew some feeling of safety and stop the jib falling in the water so much.

I would be worried the perforated ply would get smashed off, unless it was quite heavy?

The other thing is when you buried the main hull bow up to the mast step did it catch the water on the way up?

Samnz

11-28-2008, 03:38 AM

Samnz, thanks for joining in. Crew always seem to have a lack of appreciation of a "testing" program. After the first brisk sail on my boat, my son asked if we could add some extra flotation. I am interested in the ply beams, particularly on how they are attached to the hull and floats. I think you have "tested" the system well enough by now to trust them. How big of a rig are you sailing with now? Bruce

The ply beams are attached to the floats with a double bias glass tape the the deck of the float and then some 10 oz glass boat cloth overlapping about 150mm the whole way around the join. Then 3 layers of unidirectional carbon on each side of the float like a clamp.

They are attached to the main hull with a heavily reinforced flange bolted fore and aft through the original hardwood beam mounts, then db glass tape around each join, deak to beam, cabin to beam, bunktop to beam, etc.

The Aft beam has been moved aft so the front edge connects to the aft edge of the original beam mounts to give more space in the cockpit and more crew weight aft when pushing hard off the wind, as is the forward beam moved forward to give me a 2m long bunk inside.

The latest mast is 10.7m from the maststep, total of 11.9m airdraft. Im not sure if you'd want to go much bigger, the square head main is awesome for depowering in big gusts upwind but does send the bow down rather quick downwind if your not carefull!

oldsailor7

11-28-2008, 04:37 AM

The other thing is when you buried the main hull bow up to the mast step did it catch the water on the way up?

LOL. !!! I never did bury my mast step. But then I didn't have a 35 ft mast with a squaretop sail on it. :eek:

On the other hand I configured the boat to sail on the Atlantic in the area to the west of the Gulf Stream, en route to Bermuda. I had sailed there before and it can be very rough.
The deck was ply of the same thickness as the cabin side walkways supported by two longerons and pierced with a pattern of 2" holes to relieve any water pressure on top of them. I had similar decking on the stern, on either side of the transom hatch.

Two wires to the bow, supporting a fabric mesh would do the same job.

I'll see if I can find a photo of mine.

tatoski

11-28-2008, 05:05 AM

Thanks Oldsailor7. I really appreciate it. I've sent you a PM.

tatoski

11-28-2008, 05:17 AM

Thanks Oldsailor7. I really appreciate it. I've sent you a PM.

Actually I couldn't yet. I read the item on Private Messaging and it is required that I should have 5 posts or more before PM will become available to me. Anyway this is my third already. Two more. Thanks

Tatoski

oldsailor7

11-28-2008, 05:30 AM

tatoski

11-28-2008, 06:11 AM

Tatoski.
Can you get marine plywood in the Phillipines. Gaboon if possible. If you can get Samba Magogany 3 ply, that is light and OK in 1/4". What about a suitable epoxy. WEST system Epoxy may be available in your neck of the woods. If not you may have to import Bote-Cote epoxy from Australia. The correct type of epoxy suitable for boatbuilding is very important.

Oldsailor,

No problem with marine plywood and epoxy. I've built a few boats using Lauan plywood. The 1/4" has 3 ply only and has thin veneers and not so good middle ply but at least void free. Epoxy is no problem too. The local Farrier builder plant that I have visited is using local epoxy. I'll try to get the same stuff

tatoski

11-28-2008, 06:14 AM

Oldsailor,

One question, what kind of mast does the buc24 use? Aluminum masts here are quite hard to source. Is wood a possible alternative? Thanks

tatoski

oldsailor7

11-28-2008, 06:55 AM

Oldsailor,

One question, what kind of mast does the buc24 use? Aluminum masts here are quite hard to source. Is wood a possible alternative? Thanks

tatoski

The plans show stock round section 6061T6 alloy tubing. Available just about anywhere.

tatoski

11-28-2008, 07:25 AM

Oldsailor,

Thanks for the info. I have sent you a PM.

Tatoski

bruceb

11-28-2008, 12:39 PM

jorgejbp

11-29-2008, 09:15 PM

I`d like to build a Buc 24 here in Brazil, before taking such a decision, I like to see the study plans, coul you really send me a copy?This would be great!
Thks, Jorge

Samnz

11-30-2008, 02:42 AM

Samnz, Thanks, That gives me something to start with, I thought your beams looked farther apart than stock- I like it. My mast is 11m from the step ball, but is stepped about 250mm lower (I don't have a cabin) so we must have about the same size rig. I don't have a "fat head" main yet. My foredeck was extended about 75mm at the front to about 150mm at the rear on each side with a small lip turned down. It gives more working area on the deck and almost completely stops water from "climbing" the hull side and blowing back. I imagine it added about 8-10lbs total and seems worth it. I am adding netting to catch the jibs. Are Capricorn's float bows extended? Bruce

My floats and main hull are 100% stock standard. I have often thought about extending the bows on the floats, or replacing the floats or adding foils but couldnt decide what to do to optimise the boat so added the canting rig, with only 8 degrees cant adds about 1 to 2 knots on a reach!

waynemarlow

11-30-2008, 07:58 AM

bruceb

11-30-2008, 12:10 PM

Wayne, I am sorry to have diverted the thread, I am interested in new designs also, but I am sailing what I have. I am new to the forums and I didn't know how to start a new thread. There is a lot to learn from the "old 24", the basic design has stood the test of time well. My boat is still mostly stock and is boat for boat faster than any of the 24' corsairs in my area, (and most anything else under 35'), only a 31R Corsair and a Reynolds 33 are real competition, and then only when it blows- and I am working on that. Buc 24's and other ply boats can be built in about 600-800 hrs with relatively cheap materials, very little sanding, almost no equipment, and with reasonable upkeep can last a long time. Most new designs I see are glass/foam-glass construction, and glass is not a very good one-off material; the build time is way too long, the materials are very expensive and tend to be toxic in a small shop. I know from experience, I had a busy (and dusty) service department. Cutting edge purpose built race boats are nice (particularly if you have a good sponsor), and require the best and lightest construction, but are not justified for most sailors. Many of the new designs are prototype boats that would work fine with molds and production facilities but are not at all suited to a home builder. In my area, home-built glass boats don't have very much better re-sale value than wood, so any new design has to be a real breakthrough in design/performance/build time/cost before I! would undertake the project. I am getting older and I would rather sail than sand any day. As a boat dealer, I sailed on, surveyed, messed with and repaired quite a few different designs; the Buc 24 was on a very short list of boats that met my needs, I just wish I had purchased or built one 20yrs ago. It didn't hurt that I found one for an almost give-away price either:), but I was already looking at them. Bruce ( I will be happy to start a new thread for my interests, I didn't mean to take this over, it just got interesting as it went)

bruceb

11-30-2008, 12:28 PM

Samnz, I could always use another knot or two, so how do you make the rig Cant? I have read about them, but never seen or sailed with one. I am making new shrouds so this would be a good time to modify things. I have started on board trunks for my floats, (Miranda style), if I get them in and test them this spring (in about 3-4 months) I will report back with the results. I am not removing the center trunk yet so I can compare the performance. Thanks, Bruce

Chris Ostlind

11-30-2008, 01:06 PM

Guys any chance we can move this thread on from a very outdated old fashioned boat ( it maybe a good boat but it simply is not very modern in design ) to more something that is what I call a Sports racer, ie a small cabin but still fast enough to go and have fun racing with.

An example is the boat http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=82523 being built by the Swedish lads:)

I think it is more than possible to create a "modern looking" trimaran that has all the features you suggest... in marine plywood, or as a foam cored build style. As Bruce indicates, it will be a nice assignment to get that boat to actually perform better than the Buc in an overall sense.

Maybe in some areas such as:
1. convenience of launch procedures when trailered by giving it a simple folding function

2. the ability of the boat to handle a more varied sea state by giving it taller and slightly fuller amas as well as an incorporated spray chine in the vaka hull

3. the potential to offer more flowing cabin lines above the shear with enhanced function for the owner

These would be good places to start and would produce a boat that would not only retain the sailing potential, but give the boat a whole new kind of feel.

oldsailor7

11-30-2008, 03:58 PM

BRUCE.
I don't think you have "Hi Jacked the thread".
The interest has been generated by other interested, (and qualified) persons, resulting in an active discussion of a particular boat with a real history.
There is absolutely no reason that other worthy boats can't be freely discussed, as is the new Swedish one mentioned.
As far as the Buc 24 is concerned, it's like the old song---"Everything old is New again". LOL !!

Cheers. Paddy. :cool: :) :D

bruceb

11-30-2008, 05:30 PM

OK, lets keep going. Chris, I think you are right on target- any boat designed today at least needs to consider trailability and storage, besides sailing well. Boats like the L7 are certainly in the right direction, and it has been built, raced and "de-bugged", always a good thing. I have not sailed one, but I did see one on a trailer and it looked well thought out. My boat is a real pain to dismount and trailer- 2-2 1/2 hours each way and not in the water. I am working on folding it with Samnz"s beams- and a "Corsair" type bottom arm; I have built a small model that seems to work, and not too hard to add to the boat. I know our floats could be larger, I just don't know which way is best to increase the volume- length &/or beam & height. All add weight. Modern cabins have come a long way, and are pretty easy to add or modify in the early construction stage- as long as they are still kept light. I sold several "Eagles" (the tramp?) that were nicely engineered and produced tris, but they were over-weight, the cockpit sole was wet all the time and they were not nearly the boat they could have been. When I was selling boats, Stilettos were some of the few production multis that were on their design weight, and they were fanatical to do it at the factory. Many glass boats, production and one-offs, did not come close. Crowther's designs were fairly simple, but as a result, they were often built close to his specs and many were completed- something sort of rare in the homebuilt world. Phil Bolger's simpler designs are good examples in monohull sail and power; they are real world tested and proven- maybe not the "best" designs, but they surely do work and lots have been built. Bruce

Samnz

12-01-2008, 04:27 PM

Guys any chance we can move this thread on from a very outdated old fashioned boat ( it maybe a good boat but it simply is not very modern in design ) to more something that is what I call a Sports racer, ie a small cabin but still fast enough to go and have fun racing with.

An example is the boat http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=82523 being built by the Swedish lads:)

Thats a pretty awesome looking boat, some bits remind me of a seacart 30.

WayneMarlow what boats are you planning on racing against? and is there a local rule or class which would dictate the design brief?

In Auckland we have a 8.5 class rule see www.multihull.org.nz to build a new boat which doesnt fit the rule wouldnt be a good idea because you would have to race the 9m and bigger tris, and would not be able to beat them!

Would you consider a F22 with redesigned floats for racing? The main hull and beams seems well designed and proven on this boat.

The Catri 24 is a pretty cool looking boat too. http://www.catri.se/

waynemarlow

12-01-2008, 05:17 PM

[/QUOTE] WayneMarlow what boats are you planning on racing against? and is there a local rule or class which would dictate the design brief?

The Catri 24 is a pretty cool looking boat too. http://www.catri.se/[/QUOTE]

What indeed is there to race against, looking at the MOCRA web site it seems mainly firebirds, grainger cats, F31R, F25C, F27, even a SeaCart and a myriad of other 8 - 10 metre boats, which sort of makes a 7 - 8 metre boat a tad small. However cost and conveniance of small and beautiful which means light weight is high on my priorities as I intend to travel to parts of Europe with it, making the larger boats a bit of a pain to move around.

There doesn't seem to be a local class as such but I seem to remember that the F24's were in one class and the F25C in another but that was a long time ago, perhaps if there are other English sailors more in the know, they may know more.

Yep the Catri is right on top of my list but it is a lot of money, perhaps more than I have at the moment.:(

bruceb

12-02-2008, 11:04 AM

oldsailor7

12-02-2008, 04:10 PM

I have never heard of a Buc 24 being pitchpoled or capsized.

However there were a lot of them built and sailed up in Queensland where their sailing and racing conditions can be pretty rough. Someone from up there, (or in NZ) may have more information. :?:

Samnz

12-02-2008, 05:15 PM

Samnz, Looking at your club results, you and your 40year old wooden box are doing pretty well in some fast company:) On a different theme, I opened my sailing world calender december pic with Groupama in its most stable position- good view of the bottoms and foils. Does anyone here have any "experience" in pitchpoles or ?? with our size of boats? Bruce

I have replyed here...

http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/multihulls/buccaneer-24-trimaran-25159.html

Dont want to discuss and outdated design on this thread :)

oldsailor7

12-02-2008, 07:04 PM

Anyone got any more information on the Seacart 30. ?

basildog

12-03-2008, 09:23 PM

Oldsailor
Try a search on Google there is loads of info available. I know I had a quote that equated to around $300.000 Australian if I remember correctly. That was with all the goodies. Sounded fairly expensive to me!
Tony

oldsailor7

12-04-2008, 12:41 AM

$300,000.00 :eek:
Judging by the way the AUD has headed for the basement I can believe that. :(

basildog

12-04-2008, 01:30 AM

I see them advertised on the Sailing Anarchy web site for US$198000.00 Don't know what equipment specs that gets you.

oldsailor7

12-04-2008, 04:16 AM

I was particularly interested in Mike Waters "Small Trimaran Folding Systems, parts 1 & 2".
He covers the subject exceptionally well---but he missed out on one other simple system.

My second Trimaran was a Piver "Nugget" launched in July 1964.
It had solid wooden crossarms with no water stays.
The crossarms were broken by a join just outside the cabin sides.
This join was bridged by galvanized metal hinges which allowed the outriggers to be folded up onto the cabin roof.
This Tri was easily hauled out on a standard trailer, the hinge bolts unfastened and the floats hinged up on to the cabin top with little effort. My wife and I did it many times over the four years we sailed the boat.
The only drawback(and it was only a little one) was that the tri had to be lashed securely to the trailer due to the weight of the outrigger hulls being so high up on the roof. We never had a problem with that and I look back to those four years as a particularly happy and trouble free time.
Modern folding systems are easy to use---but are complex, heavy and expensive by comparison.

tatoski

12-04-2008, 05:32 PM

Guys,

Do you have pictures of the Bucc 24 on a trailer with amas demounted ready for travel? I wanted to see how this is trailered around. Thanks.

Tatoski

bruceb

12-04-2008, 05:59 PM

I have my cover on but I will post some more pics in a couple of days with out it. I have a system that I can do by myself, but a helper is nice and makes it go more quickly. You can see the fender below the port float. Bruce

tatoski

12-04-2008, 06:32 PM

Bruceb,

Thanks. I imagine the crossarms are demountable (4 pcs?) and slides into sockets on the vaka and the ends are mounted to the amas via clamps? Am I correct? thank you

Tatoski

bruceb

12-04-2008, 09:21 PM

Tatoski, Yes , lets switch to the buccaneer 24 thread, and I will post some pics as soon as I have a chance to stop by my boat. Bruce

Samnz

12-08-2008, 01:09 AM

what I call a Sports racer, ie a small cabin but still fast enough to go and have fun racing with.

An example is the boat http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=82523 being built by the Swedish lads:)

what about this?

Its loosely based on the Bucc 24 but with an updated cockpit and hull lines. Hard chine from 4mm ply the materials to build it are very very cheap, and very quick to build. The designer, Shayne Young says the vpp is quicker than a F9R...

4mm ply is lighter than foam and glass (apparantly) so is a fairly good option for this sized boat if carbon is out of the price range.

I am very tempted to build the floats for my boat...

waynemarlow

12-08-2008, 05:06 PM

I reckon it would be quite a good boat, chines are something that I haven't discounted, but man would it be an ugly duckling:eek:

Chris Ostlind

12-08-2008, 05:37 PM

I don't dislike that design approach, but I do prefer it when a plywood boat design does make an effort to create something more like smooth surfaces. Something like the drawings shown below is more along the lines of what I'd go for. Yes, there's a bit more work involved in the build.

I also prefer it when the amas have a bit more height, which gets the boat up a bit off the water for a drier ride. Personal preferences, to be sure.

This is a 16' LOA solo sport cruiser I'm doing right now for a guy who lives near me. I've been having a lot of fun working to his design brief and I like what is showing-up as a result.

boat fan

12-08-2008, 08:41 PM

Neat boat Chris....:)

How much can it carry ?

How much sail area ?

Chris Ostlind

12-08-2008, 09:05 PM

Neat boat Chris....:)

How much can it carry ?

How much sail area ?

Thanks.

Displacement is 730 lbs. calculated against one 200 lb. guy, his personal camping gear, food, fluids, 2hp outboard, small can of gas and a fudge factor. It's a light boat in 4mm ply with glass/epoxy skins. I see the boat as a waterborne version of a lightweight hiking adventure.

Sail area is 159 sq. ft. upwind with a 130 ft. screacher. Basically a modestly hotrodded Hobie 14 rig. Not looking for blistering, just spirited and easily controllable. It could go more nuclear if someone was looking to get that, but the base boat is more sedate. I like to use rigs from the thousands of ignored beach cats around the world. They're plentiful, can be had for little more than a smooth discussion sometimes and replacement sails are easy to come by, even when brand new.

By the way... that Avatar photo of yours just rocks. I really like kids, so that little dude's face is a real winner in my book.

tatoski

12-09-2008, 05:52 PM

I am still looking for a 22-24 ft trimaran to build preferably of plywood and epoxy construction, plank on frame or stitch and glue. I am seriously considering the B24 but I am still searching the net for other plywood trimarans. Saw this on the net, K 24 t, a Bill Kritoffersen design.

http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o160/tatoski_photos/pict.jpg
http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o160/tatoski_photos/sideview.jpg

Anybody who has knowledge of this boat? Any input will be much appreciated. Thanks in advance

Tatoski

bruceb

12-09-2008, 11:22 PM

The boat looks interesting, where was that one? The stock hobie sails are too light of material and construction to last very long on that heavy of a boat. The mast would be marginal even with spreaders and jumper stays. I used to be a hobie dealer and know them well. Bruce

tatoski

12-10-2008, 01:20 AM

The website address is: http://www.prcn.org/kismet/index.html
Plans are still being sold. Any firsthand info on how the boat Kismet k24 t sails? Thanks

oldsailor7

12-10-2008, 02:00 AM

jamez

12-10-2008, 02:02 AM

The Hobie rig is an option there is also a larger rig designed for the boat. Kristofferson built the first one himself. It is briefly mentioned in an article in Multihulls J/A 1993 as quick to build and fast. The prototype unfortunately lost its mooring in a storm and was wrecked. Pretty sure thats the one on the website.

If you order a study print make sure you specify a materials list comes with it.

oldsailor7

12-10-2008, 02:19 AM

If you order a study print make sure you specify a materials list comes with it.

Thats a very good point you make Jamez.

I have been giving out a study sheet for free, but it only consists of a threeview and some information about the rigging details and sailplan.

I would really like to include a materials list and the building instructions so that the prospective builder can really see what he is in for.

However the printing cost and postage has to be recovered and to do that I am considering charging for a proper study set---but offering the price to be deducted from the cost of the plans if they are subsequently purchased.

Does that seem reasonable.

jamez

12-10-2008, 02:50 AM

Hi OS7. the only reason I mention it is I ordered study prints from Bill for his 24'tri and cat and, as every other study print I've paid for (and I have lots) has had a material list, was astonished when they turned up minus these. Bill said the material list was in the full plans but promised - on 3 occasions - to email the lists to me. that was 5 years ago. Still waiting:-). Of course he may have lost my email addy or something :-)

I think you should charge for a comprehensive study set. You can always have a one pager to email people for free. The idea of taking the cost of study prints off the price of a plan order is more than reasonable IMO. After all the plans are not exactly expensive in the first place.

cheers

oldsailor7

12-10-2008, 04:17 AM

Thanks Jamez.
I am not in the boat plans business as you know, but I just feel that this particular trimaran is so good that it should not be allowed to die. That is why I am making the plans available at a price anyone can afford, in the hope that some of them will be built again, albeit with some tweaking and appropriate mods, depending on the individual builders requirements.
I might just go ahead with that idea. US$10.00 would just about cover the costs.
What do you think.?

jamez

12-10-2008, 04:43 AM

$10.00 is cheap - but as you say its to cover costs. I'd suggest sending the prints electronically though, save you the hassle of getting stuff printed and postage etc.

Chris Ostlind

12-10-2008, 08:36 AM

Why do so many wannabe designers draw their designs with flat transoms on the floats. Horrible drag when the float is depressed and it's when the boat wants to go fastest that they are most depressed. :(

Perhaps a quick look at the images shown below will serve to further stir the pot?

The two black and white images show Jim Antrim's A30+, Erin and the all white tri is Antrim's 40' Zephyr, both sporting dead flat transoms on their amas and both extremely quick machines which have set records.

The red boat is, of course, Nigel Irens' wonder ship, IDEC at her mooring in La Trinite sur Mer, France. This is the boat that set the existing Round the World record for solo boats, as well as the just established Route of Discovery (Spain to Caribbean) under the experienced hands of Francis Joyon.

Another Irens design, Sodeb'O, also shows similar thinking.

oldsailor7

12-10-2008, 04:02 PM

Samnz

12-10-2008, 04:07 PM

Four of those five Tris have TINY transoms. IDEC has the biggest, but it also has the greatest deadrise in the tail.
Also Sodebo and Idec are huge boats and the drag effect will be a tiny percentage of the overall drag, compared to the same effect on a 24' tri.

Have you seen the Hughs 24? its got a big transom and the one racing here is very very quick.

oldsailor7

12-10-2008, 04:53 PM

Yes. The Hughes 24 is a very elegant (and expensive) Tri. However if you look at the excellent video of it sailing, the deadrise on the aft end of the float keeps the transom out of the water almost all of the time. As in the Hughes 26, the transom is swept forward towards the deck, (like Miranda), which is a good way to save weight, without causing extra drag.
It's the floats which have a relatively flat keel and large vertical transoms like the SV 24 that I am concerned about.

Incidently the Hughes 26 looks like a modification of the Buc 24 with Miranda's features and a vertical stem. :eek:

Chris Ostlind

12-10-2008, 06:20 PM

Four of those five Tris have TINY transoms. IDEC has the biggest, but all of those shown have a lot of deadrise toward the tail,which is designed to move the bouancy forward as the float is immersed.
Also Sodebo and Idec are huge boats and the drag effect will be a tiny percentage of the overall drag, compared to the same effect on a 24' tri.
For instance--on this one. 7point5m tri-1.pdf (268.9 KB, 37 views)

When you say deadrise, are you talking about the aft component of the rocker profile and not the vee, or lack of same, in the hull bottom when viewed from the bow, or stern?

The way I see it, the transom drag potential on any properly designed trimaran ama is a very small function of the total boat as a whole. You can get very slender transoms with very slender sections aft. The trouble with that approach is that it contributes to enhanced pitching moments for what is already (or should be) a collection of very slender hull forms. In an effort to dampen that effect and contribute to a more stable ride, you find the amas being drawn with fuller forms and resultant wider transoms.

Check out these images of the amazingly fast Seacart30 from Sweden. This is a boat that routinely flies its main hull and is regarded as pure state of the art in the genre. Full amas, large area transoms with squared-off ends.

The third photo is the transom on the absolute latest Hobie F18 cat being shown in Paris this last week. This is a full tilt, reverse, wave piercing bow slice and dice machine that is about to hit the market.

oldsailor7

12-10-2008, 09:34 PM

Both of those are out and out speed machines and are most efficient when they are quite literally planing. The pic of the SC 30 shows the water cleanly separating from the transom--a clear indication that it is planing. In medium airs it might be a different matter.
It's interesting that the floats are quite literally cylindrical tubes with a bow at the front, the most efficient form there is for min wetted surface. There also appears to be little or no rocker in the stern sections.
Since the displacement of the floats are something like 200% and in very light airs they will barely be touching the water, the size of the transoms is irrelevant.
In the case of the F-18 I can't see the rocker, so I can't comment on that.

Stu Bloomfields "Raw to the Core" also has a flat transom with a flattened bottom edge and subtle planing strakes on it , and that Cat is probably the fastest 30' sailboat in Australia.
However it too has a reasonable rocker in the aft quarters, so it is unlikely to drag its transoms in light conditions.

BTW---my apologies for using the word "deadrise" when I should have said "rocker".
I should know better. :o

Chris Ostlind

12-11-2008, 04:34 PM

Planing, huh? I know this has the potential to become a bad can of worms when it comes to multihulls... but just what, in your mind, constitutes planing for a multihull?

When I look at the photo of the Seacart flying its main hull, I see an ama which is immersed half way up the bow form, the full ama length is in the water and the transom, while leaving what many would consider a firm flow of water off its lower edge, is still rather vertically oriented to the water's surface. Yep, those sure are really fast semi-displacement indicators, but I do not see the typical indicators one would observe from a planing hull form.

Current design thinking for ama transom shapes does not include the pintail, or even radically reduced ama transom forms. Lots of older multihulls had ama transoms such as those you describe, but none of the more modern designs include that variation. At least, none of them with which I am immmediately familiar.

I've included some additional images of the Seacart30 with leeward ama fully depressed and windward ama flying. In these images, you can see the fully expressed form of the ama. Modern trimaran amas tend to look very much ike these shown with much fuller volumes well forward, a defined rocker arc sweeping aft and much smaller volumes at the transom.

You can also see, with the Seacart30, that the cylindrical forms as mentioned, only begin to dominate the form well aft of the midpoint. Forward, the shapes are more semi-elliptical, gradually concluding in a gentle taper as they move to the vertical orientation of the bow.

No fast moving trimaran is going to be living long with its leeward ama only immersed to the transom bottom. Any kind of wind, aggressive sheeting, or lifting of the main hull (which happens the moment that the ama absorbs the weight of the full displacement) or a combo of all three, will seriously depress the ama to, at least, its half-way immersed state on racing machines and to a much greater degree for les racy designs... untill the crew scrambles out on the windward tramp to give the boat additional righting moment.

If the turbulence is such an issue from a squared-off transom, then why are virtually all the modern designs moving forward as if they could care less about the drag potential of an immersed ama of the type mentioned?

The planing thing for multihulls... I'd love to hear the collective wisdom on the matter and there's no time like the present.

bruceb

12-11-2008, 06:14 PM

I have been reading the planing or not arguments also, and of course, I have an opinion;) Around 1990, a friend of mine built a "planing" sort of tri about 20' long. The main hull was very flat aft, and the single cross bar looked a lot like an airplane wing with a downward dip at the ends creating very low aspect planing surfaces. He was a pilot and cat sailor- he called it a "wingmaran". It sort of worked, and definitely planed, but the main hull and the tips would plane at different times and not at all predictably. In just the right conditions, the craft would come up on top of the water and out-run the inflatable I was chasing it with- around 15kts plus. The small wakes that were generated looked like the wake of a fast flat-bottomed ski boat. The rest of the time, the main hull or the tips would start to dig a hole and the boat would round up or spin out. It was very easy to see which part was actually planing, and from the pictures I have seen of most bigger tris, they are not. Every planing dingy, cat, or powerboat I have seen rises at the bow as it comes on plane. If the larger tris were able to get enough lift from their hulls or amas, I don't think they would need lifting foils. Several beach cats have had flat bottom hulls and will plane under the right conditions, (even an Aqua-cat), but they give up more than it is worth the rest of the time. Bruce

BWD

12-11-2008, 06:59 PM

Dry transoms happen for two possible reasons
1. trim
2. the boat has left before the water's inertia and viscosity allow it to close up around where the boat ain't no more ;)

For most boats, at lower speeds, trim keeps transoms dry (or nearly). Once you sail past the speed at which inertia separates water from the transom, it can stay dry, while the hull is depressed. And it does depress, generally.

If it happens in a way that the water comes together behind the transom as it would around a streamlined body, it may be very efficient.
This happens in tugboats as well as multihulls (not the efficiency part), and it looks the case in the seacart pictures.

To the general planing question:

Historically, the Itzacat planed, the video convinced me.

And Parlier's seaplane-float shaped cat did, otherwise it could never have gotten up to 36kts. If I remember, the problem was more with consistency and average speeds.

I once thought some of those F tris might plane a little bit, but now realize (a) they probably don't and (b) who cares, it doesn't change the performance envelope from what you would expect.

The seacart doesn't "look" like "planing" but I say planing is as planing does. So. If you could find the actual ama volume immersed while flying a hull to be less than the total displacement, then couldn't you conclude it must have some dynamic lift?
I would consider that equivalent to planing or "might as well be planing."

It would be interesting to relate any "missing" volume to the size of the hole in the water behind the transom, and see if any interesting relationships turn up regarding that and drag..........

That Penelope cat pictured above looks like it might plane, but for some reason I disbelieve. It looks very light and everyone is in the back!

To me, the interesting part is shedding drag while adding power...

tatoski

12-11-2008, 08:03 PM

Oldsailor,

I got the study plans. Thank you very much! I'll "study" the plans. Cheers!

Tatoski

bruceb

12-11-2008, 10:13 PM

Chris, Do they ama's on both of Irens's designs really have 200% of the boat's displacement? I realize both boats are really light for their size, but the volume just looks too small. I have never seen one of these boats up close, I am just interested. Bruce

oldsailor7

12-11-2008, 10:16 PM

Chris , with respect- you are twisting my whole argument. :D
You said "The planing thing for multihulls... I'd love to hear the collective wisdom on the matter and there's no time like the present"

Who's discussing "Planing for multihulls".

That old chesnut was laid to rest decades ago. It's only "Wannabe" designers who have little experience or who have not done their research in depth who keep trying to re-invent the wheel.

Let me make it clear. In the case of Seacart. GIVEN- the cylindrical shape gives the least wetted surface drag, and GIVEN -that due to the subtle rocker at the aft end, the flat circular transom DOES not drag in the water at low speeds since the heeling moment is low. At high speeds it is a Given that the lee hull will be pressed down in the water and the transom will be below the surrounding waterline. BUT, at the high speed that the boat is travelling the after part of the ama is PLANING. But I am sure not by design.
You said it yourself--"Yep, those sure are really fast semi-displacement indicators," Quote.

Also: Quote.
No fast moving trimaran is going to be living long with its leeward ama only immersed to the transom bottom. Any kind of wind, aggressive sheeting, or lifting of the main hull (which happens the moment that the ama absorbs the weight of the full displacement) or a combo of all three, will seriously depress the ama to, at least, its half-way immersed state on racing machines and to a much greater degree for les racy designs... untill the crew scrambles out on the windward tramp to give the boat additional righting moment.

If the turbulence is such an issue from a squared-off transom, then why are virtually all the modern designs moving forward as if they could care less about the drag potential of an immersed ama of the type mentioned? Quote.

Exactly. :cool: You have just made my point. As you have just explained above-- the water is cleanly cut off from the bottom and sides of the transom and is thus making NO TURBULANCE DRAG. IE:- Call it what you like, It's PLANING.

Under no circumstances should this be construed that Planing hulls on ANY type of multihull are a viable option.

Now all of the above is a quite different Kettle of Fish from a DIY small cruising design, which is brobably going to end up as a heavily loaded boat which sails most of the time with its leeward AMA well submerged at (relatively) slow speeds.

The turbulance drag of big transoms which remain submerged during 90% of the boats sailing time are a poor design feature.

IMHO.

Chris Ostlind

12-12-2008, 01:11 AM

OS7,

I'll answer your post in the morning. It's late. I've been at the boat shop all evening and I need to get some shut-eye.

Later,

oldsailor7

12-12-2008, 05:30 AM

OS7,

I'll answer your post in the morning. It's late. I've been at the boat shop all evening and I need to get some shut-eye.

Later,

LOL Chris. Thats OK.

Just remember this is a 22'-24" TRIMARAN thread and we really shouldn't be talking about bigger, faster, racing multihulls.

We have to remember that the effect of an item of drag has a much higher percentage of effect on a small boat compared to a larger one.

By the same token, as boats get smaller, so do the design parameters.
However the crew, their safety gear, personal clobber and food and water supplies don't change--and become an increasing percentage of the boats total displacement. This radically affects the design approach to small Tri's.

Again---Horses for Courses. :D

franzship

12-12-2008, 11:54 PM

I need the sail plan for a Crowther Buccaneer 24 and information on other rigs from say, production monohulls which would work on it. Thanks!
Franz

oldsailor7

12-13-2008, 12:34 AM

Franz.
We need to hear more about your boat etc:, as you need 5 posts on this thread before we can communicate by secure Private Messages. :cool:

franzship

12-13-2008, 02:10 AM

The rig was walked off with.
franz

franzship

12-13-2008, 02:11 AM

It isn't mine yet.

franzship

12-13-2008, 02:12 AM

the owner spent about a month in the hospital. When he got out the rig was gone.

franzship

12-13-2008, 02:13 AM

So now I might have a shot at it, but I need to see what fits or comes reasonably close.
franz

franzship

12-13-2008, 02:14 AM

I read some of the ideas posted here about mods and they all sound pretty good!
Franz

Samnz

12-13-2008, 02:48 AM

I need the sail plan for a Crowther Buccaneer 24 and information on other rigs from say, production monohulls which would work on it. Thanks!
Franz

please move this to the Bucc 24 thread...

Samnz

12-13-2008, 02:55 AM

Now all of the above is a quite different Kettle of Fish from a DIY small cruising design, which is brobably going to end up as a heavily loaded boat which sails most of the time with its leeward AMA well submerged at (relatively) slow speeds.

The boat in question is a racing boat, and only has the cabin to meet the safety requirements in NZ for coastal racing.

I believe it will sail at wind speed or above except 'on the wind' which will sail about 9 to 11 knots, which is the only point of sail the transoms will cause a drag issue, as they may not break free/plane/whatever you wanna call it.

I also believe the boat will be level with crew weight balancing the sails in up to 10 knots of breeze, so at 10 knots boatspeed a slight submerged transom may not cause an issue?

RHP

12-13-2008, 05:49 PM

I dont think this yacht has been mentiond - she looks very nice:

http://www.biekerboats.com/Bieker_Boats/Trinado.html

Also:
http://www.trinardo.com/ and look at the pics in the Build section.

Great stuff.

oldsailor7

12-13-2008, 06:18 PM

RHP.
Thats one sharp looking little TRI. :cool:

bruceb

12-14-2008, 11:06 AM

The trinado has a really nice looking main hull. How is the tiller rigged? Bruce

RHP

12-14-2008, 11:11 AM

I dont know, it looks as though its under the rear deck?

It weighs 300kgs as opposed to 768kgs of the F24. Can it really be just 300kgs? Seems too light.

oldsailor7

12-14-2008, 04:51 PM

That would be it's dry weight without equipment or sails. :cool:

RHP

12-15-2008, 03:27 PM

I have followed this small trimaran debate with great interest and thank all those who have given time posting their thoughts and experience.

My hang up is whilst I love the concept of a 7m tri, new ones are WAY WAY too expensive vis-a-vis the F22 etc.. for the family man earning an honest crust. The Micro 23 seems half way to a decent price but isnt really aimed at the long weekend sailor with a couple of young kids. The Astus 22.1 looks a great little boat but at about $44,000 ??? I cant justify it folks.

I feel the Trinado design concept above meets my requirements best: fast, fun, overnighting accomodation, darn good looking but most importantly the ability to be cheap (sic). Using the Tornado amas and rig is half the battle leaving you to focus on the main hull. Unless I am a complete divvy, if someone produced a mould and banged out some GRP centre hulls and decks in unfinished format surely a) they could be pretty cheap and b) there should be a far larger market than those willing to fork out what $60,000+ for an F22?

I wonder how big the market would be for someone producing centre hulls for owner completion and/or factory finished?

I lie in bed worrying out these things y´know.......... :D

bruceb

12-15-2008, 10:54 PM

Rhp, In my area of the US, a power boat hull and deck with about the same amount of GRP costs about $5000-6000 US retail. Unfortunately, I have never known multi manufactures to stay in business for very long:( I think multi buyers are the type to want something new and different, not very good for a long, profitable production run. I guess I am typical- I have a good boat, and now I want to change it. I like the Trinado also.
:cool: Bruce

Gary Baigent

12-15-2008, 11:39 PM

"If there is a way, there is a f@&%ing way" - so said that savage English actor.
Design and build it yourself, not difficult, study designs and BEGIN, takes time but saves huge amounts of dosh - then use basic building materials and the best is 4mm tensioned ply, or strip planked light woods, with glass and epoxy (or even polyester like Jim Brown did with Searunner) - forget expensive foams or honeycombs and total carbon sheathing, (what do the hotshot French sailors do? - grind the expensive laminates back to a minimum - this is looked on askance by the safety Nazis of course) - but if you are want a boat and can't afford the astronomical cost of buying one or getting one built professionally, doityourself, (in this day and age you have little option anyway; it is like a return to NZ in the golden 1950 -'60''s when every bloke in the street was designing and building their own, good innovative designs too). Use less material and, as I said, ply is hard to beat - look at ancient Infidel/Ragtime, built in urea formaldehyde glues too. You take a chance of course of having a lightweight hull that will not withstand smashing a sunken reef apart - but then, aside from steel, there are few materials that can survive that anyway. Rule no 1: don't hit things, like riding motorcycles: don't crash - and chances are you won't.
And if you do, well, you have built in bulkheads and flotation chambers to keep you up.

RHP

12-16-2008, 06:36 AM

God how I hate the voice of reason !! :-) :-)

I´m gonna take a look at it.

Chris Ostlind

12-16-2008, 07:30 AM

Gary...? Serious question.

Can I quote your posting on my website? I've been composing a set of comments about home building and this post of yours is remarkable in its context.

RHP

12-16-2008, 01:55 PM

You can post my response as well if you want Chris ! :D

Gary Baigent

12-16-2008, 02:42 PM

Of course, Chris.

oldsailor7

12-24-2008, 06:30 PM

AND a Merry Christmas to ALL. :) :) :)

NiklasL

01-09-2009, 03:26 PM

Hi guys.

I like the thread by the way.
I wouldnt buy a seacart, it is a high maintenance boat for racing only.
The sails are also expensive, but if you have a good income, plus skills in the cockpit go ahead.

I have discovered a boat called Corsair 750 sprint, it is THE "peoples seacart"
It is a good boat and design. In that size things can't get much better. It is fast and can handle waves and wind better than many simular sized boats.
It is easey to trailer and low maintenance and good storage room below also.

http://www.corsair-sweden.com/sprint.html

oldsailor7

01-09-2009, 07:40 PM

As RHP said---"how many people are there willing to fork out $60,000 PLUS for a 7.5M tri ", with poor accommodation, when you can build a high performance DIY Tri for less than half that ??? :eek:

NiklasL

01-10-2009, 07:10 AM

Only those who don't have time to build or that are lazy enough.;)
Plus who likes one design racing since it is better for comparing skills on the water. But if it is a construction contest then go ahead and build. =)

unionjak

01-14-2009, 01:40 PM

hello oldsailor7,
Can you provide me(via email) with the study plans for the Kismet k24t ?

If you can i would be happy to pay via paypal etc but would need to know the details.

Many thanks,
Steve.

oldsailor7

01-14-2009, 05:10 PM

Sorry Steve.

I am not in the boat design plans business.

I am just a retired guy who is making the Buccaner 24 plans available again, because I believe that it is too good a design to just let die.

Apparantly there are plenty of B24 owners/restorers/sailors/builders who agree with me. :D

Chris Ostlind

01-14-2009, 05:38 PM

In the US, there is what is known as a "hotrod culture" in which enthusiasts and romanticists of the golden days of American cars; the days when engines and fins were huge, as well as the testosterone levels of those driving the beasts were in full bloom.

These guys meet on warm summer evenings, typically, at a local hamburger joint and show off their rides, their big bellies, their now older babes and their propensity to spend huge sums of money chasing that long ago dream with the car of their choice.

Oldsailor7 is one of these guys, as are many of us here... only we do it with our boats. We hold onto our crusty dreams of days gone by and make snide comments about all the young dudes in their carbon fiber whiz-bangs with computer generated foils and sail rigs from another planet. Secretly, we all would just flat love to have one of these modern go-fast rides, but age and the realities of managing the funds correctly for our sunset years have cast a new process of thinking across our bows, as it were.

Some of these wonder boats from yesteryear can still hold their own in the face of modern competition and the Buc 24 is one of them when properly maintained and sailed with a sense of urgency and shrewdness acquired from years of putting the royal yachtsmen in their place.

Long live the classic multihull gang!

bruceb

01-15-2009, 10:45 AM

Hey, be nice, I have the belly and the old hot-rods too. (and some carbon fiber) Fast is still fun! Bruce

unionjak

01-20-2009, 03:36 AM

Hello,
Oldsailor did you manage to do the in-detail study plans for the bucc 24 ?

I am very new to this game but am keen....however i am on a very tight budget.
Is the bucc 24 a stitch and sew or will i have to make some kind of framing to hold things up ?
In short is the bucc good for new people to build ?
And one more.....what is the accomodation size in the cabin.

Manythanks,
steve.

oldsailor7

01-20-2009, 04:21 AM

Steve.
Your post is OT for this thread.

If you go to "24' Trimaran Plans for Sale" in the "Marketplace" sub-forum, you will find a three view which you can print down "Landscape" and scale up 140%. Materials list is there also.

Hope this helps. :D

marios

02-01-2009, 03:54 AM

Good morning,
how see and buy the Buccaneer plans, please?Thank You
Marios from Italy

oldsailor7

02-01-2009, 05:15 AM

Good morning,
how see and buy the Buccaneer plans, please?Thank You
Marios from Italy

Marios. Thanks for your inquiry.

Your post is Off Topic for this thread.

If you go to "24' Trimaran Plans for Sale" in the "Marketplace" sub-forum, you will find a three view which you can print down "Landscape" and scale up 140%. Materials list is there and also building instructions.

When you have made five posts on these forums I can talk to you via Private Messaging.

Hope this helps.

marios

02-01-2009, 05:46 AM

Thank You
Marios

johnelliott24

02-18-2009, 12:29 AM

I have just completed a 24ft hydrofoiling tri. The design objective was to use lots of production parts, to rig in 15 minutes from trailer to water and to be quicker than anything in all conditions except large waves. Once I get it sorted, I plan to add an optional cabin like the buc 24's, that quickly fastens in sections on top of the base tri. One person called it a "tinker toy" because everything pops together. The cabin will fit in sections even in my minivan with the amas. My tiny 8 ft trailer will carry the main hull and mast in a very narrow, aerodynamic package for long trips.
I think that being highly modular and using foils is the future. It allows rapid reconfiguration and the foils not only provide great speed but allow you to run tiny amas. Mine are designed to allow you to board via the amas and to hold the boat level when stationary. That is really all they do. This results in a pretty good sized, fast boat that is much easier to store and move around than my 20ft beach cat. I'll post some pictures when she goes out this Spring. The link below has some shots of my first tri. The second one is very similar. Let me know what you think about a cabin design if you have any ideas. Thanks
http://s371.photobucket.com/albums/oo159/johnelliott24/Precarious%20the%20trimaran/

bruceb

02-19-2009, 04:10 PM

That looks like a great example of leaving off anything that is not necessary:cool: I hope it sails as fast as it looks. What materials are you planing to use for your cabin? B

johnelliott24

02-27-2009, 05:36 PM

That's a good question that I have been thinking about a lot. I'd like to be able to reduce cabin windage at a moments notice -- so maybe it will have a folding top , or be an inflating PVC structure or a tent like structure. The bottom will be plywood. I use a lot of carbon, but for a cabin I will not. To go fast it will be best to leave the cabin behind. So instead of making a "fast cabin" out of carbon I'll just use inexpensive materials. I kind of like the idea of pumping up a good sized cabin in PVC and then being able to quickly deflate it to really move to windward. PVC would be rain proof, and provide some insulation, but would weight only a few pounds. What do you think?

bruceb

02-27-2009, 09:26 PM

I have been looking at a cross between a bimini and a fabric pop up cabin sort of like some production cruisers use (Catalina 22s and others). Same reason, it would be nice to flatten it or leave it at home. Having had several self deflating air mattresses, I am not sure I would trust a light inflatable cabin to be there when you wanted it, but I do like the simplicity. I used a two man camping tent on one of my tramps last summer and it was very comfortable and easy to deal with, but I would not want to go to weather with it up;) Bruce

johnelliott24

02-28-2009, 10:13 PM

Funny you mention air mattresses because the new boat is designed to fit 2 twin air mattresses perfectly between the beams -- length going outwards. They are enclosed in a "pillow case" made of tennis backstop for protection and to look better. The beams have light poly rope loosely draped between the beams and the the "pillow cases" sit in the rope and then are lashed into place. The advantage of this is that they are as light or lighter than trampoline material, they smooth out the beams so there is less air drag, they are very comfortable and dry, and if there is an accident, they add flotation ( the boat has 5 flotation members with them ). If they leak they are easily replaceable.

bruceb

03-03-2009, 04:32 PM

I like that- I have several flotation bags in my hulls, but they just add weight and take up space unless/until:( they are ever needed, and air matresses have a lot! of volume. Nice! Bruce

tugboat

03-13-2009, 11:52 AM

hey RHP! yeah i hear you-i have designed and built five boats- all of them "intuitively" designed- no autocad etc. and very inexpensive. and they work well. a hull is not the "expensive" part of a boat- the sails and the fittings- complex electronics, cell phones, depth finders, computers etc. are what makes it expensive--after all just uttering the word "yacht" makes the average guy wince in economic fear and take up birdwatching.
And we are getting so complicated, that we are going to sea in floating electronic condos with sails!- it goes on ad-infinitum!- faster , more complicated, bigger, - more expensive. toys! toys! toys!
- i think we are forgetting WHY we sail in the first place- to enjoy sailing! to travel, to connect to nature and water. I think we need to lose the complexity and luxury-
right now im designing and building a tri that is a cruiser and fast-- but I am talking bare minimum essentials here; hull, food, water and a mattress-(sleep) and cabin for shelter(and of course the minimum coast guard requirements)- To me, nothing more is needed except wind. Poor and rich alike should know what it is like to sail his own boat....bollocks to the convention!- so i say-

if you want a good inexpensive tri, use designs that employ ultimate simplicity-
Albeit, perhaps it wont win any awards...but
my philosphy is about using gut instinct design and sailing methods, because for me they work. also i look to the polynesians- They never did some sacred "autocad trimaran prayer dance" and the lines plans for the latest balsa log hull were air dropped by seagull the following week! nope they just went - hey look at that log float- hmmm i bet it'd make a great ama! what if we we tied it to our canoe? They kept things simple.
for instance, I say If people dont like my practical polytarp sails and i get sneared at- well...hey who am i to stop someone from a good insult. i say go ahead laugh aweigh!
See, I get the last laugh- especially when i am sailing and they are in a five year build ashore still saving up for dacron and fittings and computer electonics. but to each their own. if they can "afford" to be dependant on high tech...hey all the more power to them...if not.."go with your inner compass"!
peace to all.

ThomD

03-21-2009, 02:03 AM

When I built my KHSD 23 it cost 3500 can., 200 for plans, 1000 for the hobbie rig, and 1000 for a trailer. I might have spent twice the 3500 building it on molds, rent, tools etc... But for the most part the rate of expenditures on that kind of stuff has been stable over my lifetime, so whether it is really appropriate to allot those costs for the period of the build to any one project is questionable.

I have gone over the list of materials, in the last 20 years most have stayed the same number, ply, cloth. Epoxy has gone down dramatically with many more competitive brands, many reasonable quality. About the only thing that has got more expensive is lumber which is up by a factor of four+, though I think we also know more about alternatives, and have many strategies to spin it out, and it was wasted in certain areas in the design I built. Up here finding second hand sails cost me more than two complete boats in the US, and I think Cragislist would have been a huge help had it existed, keeping the cost of the sails and trailer much lower. Of course, anyone building today has access to the internet for a mountain of useful how and what to do information, which saves a lot of dough we spent on long distance, study plans, travel, books, magazines, etc... So I think it would be possible to hit those number again, give or take. The idea that one needs to spend 30K on a boat this size that is homebuilt is not always true. Though one can easily spend any number on outfitting where my budget was clearly woeful. Still you could get it launched and then play upgrade for ever after.

My biggest mistake was that I built the wrong boat. The boat is an excellent design, but not cruising enough in focus for what I wanted. Too slow to launch for the gunkholling exploits I had in mind, and horribly configured for the camper minded person. And it ought to have been obvious. It would have served the club sailor off a mooring type user to a T. I have never seen a Farrier I didn't dislike, but the likelihood is that his Trailertri 18 would have been perfect for me, and would have spent a lot more of the last 20 years in the water than has the boat I built.

Chris Ostlind

03-21-2009, 09:27 AM

Could you sell the Hughes boat and construct something more to your needs?

jamez

03-22-2009, 04:57 AM

There is no doubt the wrong boat will get used less. I've used my Wharram more in the 2 years its been in the water than I used my keel-boat in 10 years. Everythings easier and its just more fun.

Options for a home built folding tri were certainly limited 20 years ago.
Ray Kendricks Scarab 18 looks a sensible modern design of that type/size.

tugboat

03-27-2009, 09:58 AM

Yes they are. :cool:
oldsailor7- i sent you a private message- do you still have the plans I havent heard from you--??..i am interested in the plans and will buy a set as soon as you tell me how to do that??

sorry for posting this in public but thought somehow my private message to you never got there..thanks..btw there must be a way to build this without waterstays!???

tugboat

03-27-2009, 10:17 AM

hwbd

05-01-2009, 09:10 PM

Hi I am new to the world of boat building and I am wondering does anyone have a rough estimate on the cost of materials for a 24foot trimaran.

Samnz

05-02-2009, 05:42 AM

Hi I am new to the world of boat building and I am wondering does anyone have a rough estimate on the cost of materials for a 24foot trimaran.

Dont know about Ireland, but over here a simple ply tri hulls, $7000, rig and sails $7000, beams and hardware, $5000.... very rough guide for very simple setup. could easy be 3x that if you wanted to use exotic materials.

Could also be a lot cheaper if you can get some deals...

hwbd

05-02-2009, 06:20 AM

Samnz

05-02-2009, 07:07 AM

Hi thanks for the quick reply. Just on the first $7000 is that for ply and resin? And to be honest I am not looking at using a sail I was thinking of a powered tri...

What would be your thoughts on a diesel Inboard and in particular a VW group 1.9tdi(Lightweight,High Horsepower & Torque and very economical).

Yea prob include paint, fastnings, timber for stringers etc.

Dont see a prob with the motor, needs to be marinised tho could be expensive.

hwbd

05-02-2009, 03:20 PM

what is the most expensive part of the basic build materials?

and what exactly does marinising the engine entail?

Samnz

05-02-2009, 09:30 PM

Samnz

05-02-2009, 09:36 PM

what is the most expensive part of the basic build materials?

and what exactly does marinising the engine entail?

Maybe start a new thread on this, it sounds like a cool project, the author of this thread has already got annoyed by me talking about an outdated design, let alone a power tri!

however as far as I know (im not a marine engineer) you just have to figure out how to cool the motor. This is called marinising and it usually involves running saltwater thru a heat exchanger to cool the fresh cooling water, then it needs a gearbox etc...

My parents used a marinised tractor motor in there 50ft cruising yacht and have done over 10000 ocean miles with great sucess.

The most expensive part of a boat is the labor, then the mast and sails or motor (for a power boat). Everything else is cheap.

oldsailor7

08-20-2010, 03:36 AM

Just to get back on topic--which is 22 to 24 ft Trimarans.
I have a spare set of Buccaneer 24 Trimaran plans for sale if anyone is interested. :?:

BillAU

08-20-2010, 04:55 AM

For a 24' Tri, how about a Jim Brown/John Marples SC24MC?
Here are the line drawings for my SC24MC:

http://www.allboatinghub.com/images/sc24/SC24-3.jpg

http://www.allboatinghub.com/images/sc24/SC24-1.jpg

http://www.allboatinghub.com/images/sc24/SC24-2.jpg

I'm building one and another member from this forum has just ordered a set of plans. :D
All ply and timber can be bought from your local timber yard and most of the hardware can be bought from your local hardware store or/and you can make the part in your workshop :D

oldsailor7

11-16-2010, 09:39 PM

BILL.
How are you getting on with your SC24.?
You did say you would try to have it ready in time for Christmas.
Are you getting ahead.? We would love to hear.
Cheers. OS7

BillAU

11-20-2010, 06:02 PM

G'day OS7,

Because of health problems and other goings-on in my life, I have not been able to start building. It now looks, because of my health, like my SC24MC will not be built...Well, not by me at any rate :( That being the case I have no use for the 19' cat or the SC24MC plans...I bought the 19' cat to use it's 30' mast, boom and sails on the SC24MC but as I have said, it now looks like I'll not be building the Tri :(

Cheers OS7,

Bill AU

PS. If any of you are thinking of buying or building a boat...Don't leave it to long! Go do it NOW! If you don't, you too may find yourself in my situation.

cardsinplay

11-20-2010, 06:17 PM

Tough break, Bill. Your "go out and do it" comments are heartfelt and poignant. I hope things change for you and you can come back to the boat project in the near future.

oldsailor7

11-20-2010, 09:00 PM

BillAU

11-23-2010, 04:45 AM

Waterat

11-24-2010, 11:19 AM

oldsailor7

11-24-2010, 10:52 PM

Anyway Paddy, the 19' Cat I have is a Quest B3, the Quest Cats are Aussie designed for home builders and the one I have is ply and in need of renovations...The mast, boom and two sails, main and jib are in great nick...Let me know if your interested mate.

Sorry Bill.
Since I lost the use of my left arm I am not asked out to sail/race any more, and boatbuilding is also "Out the Window". Just a fact of life. :rolleyes:

cavalier mk2

11-25-2010, 12:25 AM

We took a few boatloads of injured troops sailing for the Army and a few had to spend the time in bunks but there is always a way.....Did anyone continue the foundation started by Tristan Jones after his amputation when he modified the trimaran?
In this size range I'm still pestering the Nicols to print some Clipper plans.....for a daysailer in a area with shallows the keel and ama skegs make sense.

BillAU

12-22-2010, 11:55 AM

JEEZ Bill.
Sorry to hear that. :eek:
It's rotten that these things happen.
I know how you must feel, because the same thing happened to me just as I was about to start building a Woods "Gwahir".

I am sure you can offload the plans, but what about the 19' Cat. What design is it?
Cheers. Paddy. :D
G'day Paddy,

Quick update, I have not tried to offload the SC24MC plans or the Quest B3 Cat, crook or not and no-matter what the wife says...I still want to build that Tri...If I can manage it. I have sold a lot of other gear, including my second love, my old 1988, 3.6 Daimler, 5 new tyres for the Daimler, tool sets and other mech' gear, so I now have loads of empty space in my workshop. ;)
I'll be going back into hospital in January, for a inspection ;) or/and another operation...I'll know on the day...They tell me nothing before hand!
Anyway, as I have said, I still want to build the SC24MC. So tonight I wrote to John Marples asking if I can use the 19' hulls from the Cat for the amas on the Tri, if I can use the Cat hulls, that would save me a fair bit of time as I would only need to build the main hull and beams for the Tri.

I may be a silly old day-dreaming cudger but I hate giving-up on anything...Specially if I haven't given it a fair go. I feel sure I can build the Tri...If I'm carefull and don't trying to do things that are just to much for me but...One thing I don't want to do is to start and not finish the Tri! :(

Anyway, I'll wait and see what John has to say about me using the Cat hulls for the Tri, then I'll go from there.

Cheers, Bill

oldsailor7

12-22-2010, 04:03 PM

Cheers Bill.
Sounds like you have got a plan.
Go for it.
All the best. Paddy.

BillAU

12-25-2010, 08:34 PM

To keep things in order, I'll post further reports on:
http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/multihulls/brown-marples-seaclipper-24mc-33347-3.html
instead of posting to both threads ;)

Bill
Australia

BillAU

12-29-2010, 12:26 PM

Hi Bill, I'm sorry to hear your bad news :( Hopefully things will improve for
you. Check out the postage to Ireland on the Cat , Will You ?? :rolleyes:
The way the country here is going down the tubes it will be all I can afford :confused: Anyway, hang in there, Mate, Best Regards, Johnny.

G'day Johnny,

I sent you a PM today, letting you know what gives with me and my SC24MC :)
I've also sent John Marples another message to get some clarification on the Akas. I'll let you know what he says.
Let me have your SKYPE contact details and I'll call you one morning for a chin-wag :)

Cheers for now.

Bill

sunnysailor

04-12-2011, 12:29 PM

I can supply Buccaneer 24 trimaran plans.
Arguably the best all round 24" trimaran ever designed.

Hello All, i am new on the forum,after building a tiki 21 i am keen to build a buccaneer 24.
Hello Old sailor,you are experionsted with the buc 24,could i use a tiki 21 rigg on it ?
it has no spreaders,so only the ama will have to keep it up,this wingsail is nice with a mast from just 6,45 easy to set up and a low point of pressure.

sunnysailor

04-12-2011, 12:48 PM

Hello All, i am new on the forum,after building a tiki 21 i am keen to build a buccaneer 24
Old Sailor,could u tell me what you think about possibility to use a tiki 21 rigg on a buc 24 ?
it has 20 square meters,no spreaders so the amas has to hold it up.
the wingsail is so nice,a mast from just 6,45 is easy to set up and with a low point of pressure

oldsailor7

04-12-2011, 06:46 PM

Since the B24 in stock form has no spreaders I would think that a wing mast with it's shrouds attached to the leading edge of the mast would be just fine.
You would have to use a towball sitting in an Oak socket to take the download on the pivoting mast. A well proven system. :D
Since the shrouds on the B24 go to the outside of the floats they will not restrict the rotation of the mast too much.
I had a similar system on my Piver Nugget and it worked very well. :cool:

oldsailor7

04-15-2011, 08:44 AM

sunysailor.
I didn't answer your question, did I. ?
You asked if the B24 would take the Tiki 21 rig.
Since the B24 and the Tiki 21 have roughly the same sail area,
I can't see why not. :D OS7.

oldsailor7

04-20-2011, 12:53 AM

I found this quote by Ian Farrier. I think he just about nails it. :D

"Multihulls are now one of the fastest growing segments of the sailboat market. They have circumnavigated the globe at record speeds, and are rapidly becoming the family cruising boat of choice as more is learned about their many other advantages. These include level sailing, unmatched stability, deck space, unsinkability, shallow draft, comfort, and just the sheer fun of sailing a fast and responsive cruising boat".

Waterat

04-20-2011, 05:45 AM

Hi SunnySailor, The Tiki rig will be slightly underpowered. Thats no bad thing
as it will give you time to settle to the boat. Trimarans are fast craft
and you need to spend time learning all the little knacks and how to
sail her properly.;)

Hi Oldsailer, Re the Farrier quote, Well we knew that already, didn't we :D:P:D

Fair winds to all, Johnny.

sunnysailor

04-20-2011, 05:39 PM

Hello all,

is there someone who has thaught about a simple faulding system for the buc
24 ?
it could give a easier and shorter assembletime.

Thanks Johnny,a few meters less is not a problem,i live in turkey were a termal wind is blowing for months with 20+ knots is blowing:)

greetings to all,

Marco

oldsailor7

04-20-2011, 11:18 PM

is there someone who has thaught about a simple faulding system for the buc
24 ?

Go to the B24 Builders Forum, Page 45, post # 667, and read all about what Bruce is doing.

Bigfork

04-21-2011, 12:13 AM

Check out the Mike Waters 22 and 17...neat-o. I don't think anyone is building the 22 yet, but there is at least one 17 in the water (the potential of the high performance rig looks sweet too!). He's got a pretty extensive web site.

eakingfisher

08-16-2011, 11:42 PM

looking build bar 24 or 28 Can I purchase plans?
Thanks eakingfisher

bruceb

08-18-2011, 08:00 PM

Marco, (and any others), I have been sailing and enjoying my boat instead of working on it. Sailing is fun! Sanding and epoxying- not so much:( I have built one a-board, but got the fit a little tight so I am re-doing it. (more sanding) I will get back on the folding system later this fall. It isn't really anything special, the geometry is much like a Farrier or Scarab, the hardest part is picking the main hull attach points and keeping them light and strong. I will probably still use dyneema water stays as the buc is wider than the "folding" tris and loads the beams more. I had a great sail on monday- hot 12-15 knot winds, warm water, about 800 lbs of crew and a 100 lbs more of gear and beer and still saw 7kts upwind and 12-15kts reaching. The Buc is really fun. B

oldsailor7

08-18-2011, 08:52 PM

Glad you are enjoying your sailing Bruce. We enjoy sailing here all year round, although it's a bit cold and wet right at present.. However we know Spring is only about three weeks away now.
I have just got out of hospital after a right shoulder operation which was successful, but entails several more weeks of rehab. Given my left arm is permanently knackered I am afraid my boat building and sailing days are over.
However my interest in multihull sailboats is undiminished and "that 24 ft Tri" is still available.
Reallly interested to see how your use of dyneema for the water stays works out.
If it is successful it will be a great technical breakthrough for use in all small trimarans, not just yours. :D

bruceb

08-18-2011, 09:36 PM

I have been "testing" a length of 7/16 "Amsteel" (and my splicing) between my truck and a hard spot. So far, the dyneema is winning, but I haven't "jerk" tested it yet. I want to find a way to limit the impact to about 12,000 lbs. Once it has been under load for a while, it doesn't seem to creep but I think it will need to be re-tensioned after it is unloaded such as folding and trailering. It is really light and easy to work with and will save about 20 lbs on each end of the boat if I can trust it. B

aussiebushman

08-18-2011, 09:37 PM

Go to the B24 Builders Forum, Page 45, post # 667, and read all about what Bruce is doing.

Great minds (also my inferior model) think alike. Here is the full size pattern made for my Trinardo hybrid now about 80% completed. The folding system was modelled on the Scarab but adapted for the dual beams I'm using. The upper component of each beam is actually 100 X 50mm alluminium box section and the lower is a demountable (3 parts) A-Class cross beam. The struts are doubled - a top and bottom pair for each beam, all 40 X 6mm 316 S/S.

Although it looks though the amas will foul the trailer, actually they will not because a sliding frame will lift the hull clear of the existing fixed frame. Note the asymmetrical amas.

Cheers

Alan