24 ft trimaran

[Chris01]

Hallo!
I am interested in small, trailerable trimarans and I found the Dragonfly 800 and the F 24 with a lot of information and happy sailers. There are as well some new designs like the CATRI 24 or the TRITIUM 720, but I only found the builders or the designers article. No self-builders or sailors! -Does anyone know something about this boats? Or has anyone ather suggestions for a small, trailerable, fast trimaran which should be able to cross parts of not protected waters as well.

Thanls a lot!
Chris

[DGreenwood]

http://www.multihulldesigns.com/
Or
www.chriswhitedesigns.com
These guys have some homebuilds and some possible boats they are brokering.

[tspeer]

I suggest you post your question to the Multihulls list, http://steamradio.com/mailman/listinfo/multihulls.

If you're interested in the F-24 (great boat! I have a MkI) you might want to contact the F-boat list, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/F-Boats/ . You can get all kinds of advice about Farrier designs (Corsair-built and homebuilt). Ian Farrier himself participates on the list, so you can go right to the source.

There's also a dedicated list just for F-24 sailors: http://www.rdwarf.com/mailman/listinfo/24owners

If you're really interested in building, there's the Multihull Boat-builder's list, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/multihull_boatbuilder/

Personally, I think the best value for the money would be to look for a used F-24. You have to experience the Farrier folding system to really appreciate how easy it is to use and how much flexibility it adds to the boat. I think you'll find the performance of the Farrier designs is higher than that of the comparable Dragonfly boats. The Dragonflies have a nicer, more "nautical" interior appointments. Both the Dragonfly and the Corsair boats are well built. Homebuilt boats, obviously, vary a lot with some being works of art and others being a real piece of work.

[Inga]

Hi Chris!

I am employer of the new company that is started to build CATRI 24 trimarans in Ventspils, Latvia. At this moment the first our timaran- CATRI 24 No5 is in the process. It will be ready approximately at October. If you are interested in CATRI 24 trimarans please go to following websites and see information. I thing that you choose this model because CATRI 24 is an ideal cruiser or racer, utilizing 21st century technology to achieve new levels of performance and safety at an affordable price!
http://www.catrigroup.com/en.htm
http://www.multihull.de/catrimarine/
http://www.ldja.lv/jahtas_catri24.html
http://www.catri.se/
http://www.google.lv/search?hl=lv&ie=UTF-8&q=catri+24&meta=

Regards,
Inga


Hallo!
I am interested in small, trailerable trimarans and I found the Dragonfly 800 and the F 24 with a lot of information and happy sailers. There are as well some new designs like the CATRI 24 or the TRITIUM 720, but I only found the builders or the designers article. No self-builders or sailors! -Does anyone know something about this boats? Or has anyone ather suggestions for a small, trailerable, fast trimaran which should be able to cross parts of not protected waters as well.

Thanls a lot!
Chris

[jetcross18]

You can check out my website at
http://mysite.verizon.net/res78939/index.html
Norm Cross design home is now here. Designs are available from 18 to 78 feet. My boat is a Cross 18 I built myself. It is trailerable and allot of fun.

Check it out.

Jeff

[mistral]

may i skipper her by myself....or I'd better take some lessons from Luke Skywalker ????? ;) ;) ;)

jealous guy
Mistral

[Doug Lord]

Glossdesign-that is simply one of the most excitingly beautifull trimaran designs I have ever had the pleasure to see! Thanks!

[tspeer]

Well, it's visually arresting. But it looks like something designed by an artist who's never sailed on a multihull before. I don't think I'd want to be on it in a blow.

It's interesting to see how he's integrated a 4-bar type of folding mechanism with the hull structure.

[Doug Lord]

Tom what, specifically, about this design makes you say that it looks like it was designed by an artist who's never sailed a trimaran before?

[sorenfdk]

Tom what, specifically, about this design makes you say that it looks like it was designed by an artist who's never sailed a trimaran before?
I can't answer for Tom, but to me it seems that the LCB of the outriggers is located quite far aft. This increases the danger of pitchpoling, especially when sailing on one outrigger alone.

[Doug Lord]

Doesn't look like that to me at all. As a matter of fact since the boat is using curved lifting daggerboards similar to the Orma 60's I would say that resistance to pitchpoling would be significantly higher than on tri's w/o such boards. Also, it seems to me that using the boards allows other choices in terms of beam to length ratio etc.
My take on the drawings is that the transoms are relatively wide compared to a Farrier, for instance, and that coupled with the boards the boat should have a great deal of pitch resistance.

[tspeer]

Well, let's show something more...

Sorry :D Tspeer: you will see it sailing on late 2005!


Well, I wish you well with the new design!

The addition of netting behind the beam helps with one of my objections - i think you'll want some ahead of the beam, too. Out at the ama is where you want the crew when going to weather, and where your spinnaker trimmer goes to see the sail. And a small tri especially needs to get the crew weight forward when going to weather - at the forward beam for a Farrier design. It's also essential to be able to get as far forward on the ama as possible to fend off the dock. Especially with a crosswind, it can be hard to get the mid to aft part of the ama close enough to step safely to the dock - just as you get the boat slowed down and turned parallel, it is blowing away from the dock.

My main objection is the apparent lack of reserve buoyancy in the ama bows. Here's what the Shuttleworth stability index recommendations look like for a typical cruising trimaran design:
http://www.tspeer.com/temp/stabilityindex.gif
The green lines show the virtual c.g. location implied by the stability index for the apparent wind given in the label. The blue lines show the combined center of buoyancy for various combinations of heel and trim.

This design has very full bows with lots of reserve buoyancy. But even it doesn't fully meet Shuttleworth's recommended amount of diagonal stability, at least in terms of balancing the diagonal and lateral stabilty at the same wind speed.

Note the importance of freeboard in the ama bow - the bow is submerged at only -6 degrees of trim. A modest increase in the sheer would significantly improve that number. The Newick style amas are starting to look a lot more attractive to me than the ones with straight sheer.

It would be very intresting to see what such a footprint plot would look like for this design.

I agree that the daggerboards look pretty far aft to my eye. If the hydrodynamic L/D is around 5, wouldn't the boards would need to be on the order of 10 - 15 degrees ahead of the c.g. to properly balance the boat? I think you'd need more lead for a daggerboard in the ama than in the main hull. Plus, these are lifting foils. Putting their lift too far back without enough reserve buoyancy in the bow is a recipe for disaster.

I'd like to know more about your folding geometry. I see one main hinge line, but I don't see a second one farther out. Can you fold it on the water? Being able to do so is a major asset to a coastal cruiser like this.

[SeaDrive]

It seems that the LCB of the outriggers is located quite far aft. This increases the danger of pitchpoling, especially when sailing on one outrigger alone.

If you take a conventional tri shape, and pull all the bows out longer and thinner, but with the same volume, then the LCB will be aft and the danger of pitchpoling about the same. Or, so it seems to me. I'm not sure it would be advantageous to do so, however.

I don't see how a wide transom would help control pitchpoling.

I worry about getting stablilty from the curved foils. I've seen too many pictures of tri's flying two hulls with foils out of the water.

[sorenfdk]

My take on the drawings is that the transoms are relatively wide compared to a Farrier, for instance, and that coupled with the boards the boat should have a great deal of pitch resistance.
OK - I'm certainly no multihull expert, but I can't see how a wider stern could increase pitch resistance.
Furthermore, it seems as if the daggerboards are located just around the mast. If the lift of the daggerboards should resist pitchpoling, I think they should be located further forward.
I mentioned LCB in my earlier posting. I realize that it is not LCB in itself that should be the main concern, but rather the (lacking) reserve bouyancy in the bows.
But it IS a great looking little beast...

[Sean Herron]

Hello...

Looks fine - but I am the Fat Egg guy...

If it starts blowing - go to the high side and reef - or turn up a bit - thats what my Granfather always screamed at me...

I would be very concerned with what looks to me like a lack of beer can holders - or same for a hot mug of coffee with some whiskey...

Pretty drawings showing what could happen in a static situation though... :)

I do not condone drinking and boating - it leads to a lot of waste...

It was my Grandfather who started it all - sailing - and putting me to sleep with whiskey and gingerale when he was forced to baby sit me - the donkeys bottom...

SH.

[John Perry]

If you take a conventional tri shape, and pull all the bows out longer and thinner, but with the same volume, then the LCB will be aft and the danger of pitchpoling about the same.

Surely if you do that you will have reduced the danger of pitchpoling because you have increased the lever arm of the reserve bouyancy (meaning the bouyancy which is not actually used when the boat is in a flat calm) in the bows. In other words you have the same amount of reserve bouyancy but it is further forward. If you stretch out the bows without making them thinner that would be even better.

However by stretching the bows you have made the whole boat bigger and increased the 'through life' cost - harbours tend to charge by length and many other boat costs are also length related.

The problem is to find the optimum ratio of length to beam and the longitudinal position of the C of G, taking into account over turning moments about both axis and I think that is where plots like Tom has produced are very relevant. From the point of view of resisting pitchpoling the CoG should be as far aft as possible, but there is a limit to that because if you take it too far aft the hulls have to become a funny shape which unlikely to be good for hull drag.

John

[Andrew]

This boat is a prototype and improves upon some of the design ques of the F24 II. It is slightly shorter in length, lighter, and easy to fold. I would keep my eye on this builder - I have a feeling he is going to produce some nice boats in the future.

Andrew

http://www.multimarine.com/L-7/L-7.html

[oldsailor7]

For a DYI 24' Trimaran design you can't go past the Lock Crowther designed Buccaneer 24.
See the Buccaneer 24 thread on these forums.