Incredible "Secrets of Yacht Design" website located... [Archive] - Page 2

mighetto

02-01-2005, 01:59 PM

Skippy, I love your style. Review by the numbers. Are these the most offensive of my comments? Would they be less offensive from others? Lets elaborate.

#220
... boats that heel to much ... are to tender for motoring, anchoring, or even entertaining dockside, because of poor initial stability. ... excessive heeling ... discourages those new to the sport and makes the boat a poor cruising vessel because all accomodations are at an awkward angle when the wind carries.

comes from post #220, where I said.

This month, in the sailing magazines, there is recognition that IMS is dead. Even the owner of the last built non-TP52 IMS boat, a boat that betters all the TP52s, sees his vessel as a buggy wip, a useless thing, a Gimcrack now that the US has gone IRC to support this technology shift to movable ballast, and lighter materials. With that recognition is the halt of trends in sailboat design that I believe have contributed to the decline of the sailing sport in the US. We are talking trends to shorter head sails and boats that heel to much because under the IMS rules these vessels had rating advantage and boats that are to tender for motoring, anchoring, or even entertaining dockside, because of poor initial stability.

What is wrong with small head sails. Well, the head sail is the sail most likely in clear air. It makes sence owing to that for it to be a powerful sail. Also when the head sail is simply jib size, it can not wrap around stays which means poor pointing. Plus that trend ignores the greatest invention in modern times for sailing - roller furling which gives the sailor an easy way to maintain the vessel on optimum heel. What is wrong with excessive heeling? Well it discourages those new to the sport and makes the boat a poor cruising vessel because all accomodations are at an awkward angle when the wind carries.

I can add that Farr Designs is the source of the notion that IMS is the reason smaller head sails have been a trend in sailboat design in the last few years as well as boats whoes optimum heel is over 15 degrees. For reasons I do not pretend to understand, these two items represent loop holes in the box rules that when exploited by a designer generate a winning vessel in IMS races.

The Mac26m follows the trend. She is unable to untilize a Genoa on upwind points of sail when the wind is above high normal (say 15 or 17 MPH). She also is sailed on her ear, much further than a Mac26x in those winds, and this style is appealing to those who have been following IMS or have been US Sailing trained to think that looks correct.

mighetto

02-01-2005, 02:16 PM

#221
After the first day, below decks on any cruising sailboat is likely going to smell like puke. If it does not it may smell of diesel. No one outside of the most fatigued is going to want to "enjoy" the comfort there. And then they will be sleeping. If the crossing is several weeks the enjoyment is the same one might get in jail.

I had written:

Hi Jan. The Mac26x is a serious ocean sailboat. There are a couple of things to realize. First, no one outside of a race, will find any boat of any racing size on the ocean comfortable.

It took serious racers to make this point to me. In the modern age, boats are transported, not because it is dangerous to make a crossing, but because the cost of wear and tear on the yacht doesn't justify the "fun" of doing so.

After the first day, below decks on any cruising sailboat is likely going to smell like puke. If it does not it may smell of diesel. No one outside of the most fatigued is going to want to "enjoy" the comfort there. And then they will be sleeping. If the crossing is several weeks the enjoyment is the same one might get in jail.

So for the future, it is likely that boats that will be making ocean crossings will be more race boat like in the interior than house like. To ignore this ignores the availability of other modern tools besides boat transport like weather reporting.

Jan has since contacted me with the Idea that a 33 foot boat (the J100) should cost less than a Schock 40 because the Schock 40 is 7 feet longer. Let me rephrase. There should be no new designs of any monohull ocean going sailboat in the 30 to say 37 foot range. The J100 would be one of those vessels that in my view is limited to protected lake use only. The Schock 40, when crewed properly, is at least capable of sailing out of harms way when weather reports indicate that is a good idea. She is likely also able to motor out of harms way in those conditions but her engine is to modest to assume that the vessel can reach hull speed in a chop.

Let me add that professional sailors make 15,000 to 30,000 PER MONTH. Now tell me that isn't fun.

mighetto

02-01-2005, 02:16 PM

#250
Your gripe is with Roger MacGregor or the GP RWP, or with lubbers who will never see sinkers superior to vessels that after being swamped still float.

I wrote

I am not the first to present these notions. Roger Magregor put them into a vessel, the Mac26x. The Internet is an international public resource, developed by multiple countries desiring to foster freedom of expression. I have a right to present ideas. No one has the right to avoid being offended. This is however what the closed minded pretend. Your gripe is with Roger MacGregor or the GP RWP, or with lubbers who will never see sinkers superior to vessels that after being swamped still float.

If you are new to the sea then the term lubber as in "land lubber" or "land lover" may not be known to you. You may also not be aware of the battle multihullers have had getting the right to race PHRF or against any monohull really. In this battle the multihull owners were all labled "Mr Dangerous" because when a multihull is capsized - and all boats can capsize - they usually can not be righted unassisted by another boat. The offending refrain has been "well at least my sh*t floats when swamped". The year before last a multi did flip durring the Van Isl 360 race, a race now 4 years old that is gaining international attention. Rather than risk a night resque, the crew put on wet suits and waited for daylight. They were not harmed by this and the vessel was recovered intact. I think this proved something. Something about safety. But two years later, I still hear about it and then the claim that multihulls are dangerous and should be banned from ocean racing because they capsize and can not be righted. Jim Teeters failed to gain the sympathy of the jury and the judge because they think like lubbers. This ability to float is a big deal. Capsize is an event that can happen in any boat given sufficient sea conditions.

The Barnegat Bay A Cats race for the oldest perpetual trophy in the United States. Since 1871 these 28 footers have extended their centerboards and risked capsize. The class deserved more than the weight of Jim Teeter's style research. Jim Teeters sees weight as the critical factor in avoiding a capsize. 80 years of racing those A Cats has shown otherwise. The critical factor is crew. Crew that knows when to reef, when to extend the centerboard, when to retract and when to call it a day. Teeters likely attacked the A Cats for the same reason as the Mac26x, only the A Cat advocates did not have a judge and jury to point out the nonesence. Teeters and those supporting the TP52 had already drawn out 30 foot fixed keel boats that were to be the next big racing thing in US sailing. I connect the dots and offend Teeter supporters with a notion that we are a forgiving nation. Get out of the way, there is much to be excited about. US Sailing has reorganized. Soon American centerboarders will be retracting the foils as the designers intended in PHRF races, gaining the advantage over fixed keel vessels long known to have been possessed by them.

mighetto

02-01-2005, 02:26 PM

Please it's obvious from the posts, that Frankie knows everything. Please if we just sit and listen (ie don't reply), then we can all just enjoy his greatness.

I am great in monolog mode! Tradition does encourage posters to chime in now, however. Who will hit the 5,000 view mark? The countdown has started. Has any thread in the history of boat design.net been viewed so much in such a short period of time? And by so few Macgregor Yacht owners? The minions haven't even been called. Huzzah Huzzah, keep the comments coming by email, if not by a post. mighetto@eskimo.com

mighetto

02-01-2005, 02:44 PM

Hey did someone hack the view counter again. Lets start a petition

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/create.html

Stuck on 4978, how is this rat going to get his food pellet?

SeaDrive

02-01-2005, 03:19 PM

What does a Mac want to be when it grows up, and is fit to go to sea?

ForedeckShuffle

02-01-2005, 03:42 PM

What happens if you bolt two M26 carcasses together to form a cat? How about 3, with one slightly forward in the middle, is this a tri like the one Ellen is using?

woodboat

02-01-2005, 03:47 PM

Mighetto, I think you need to simply clear your cache. My view shows 5026 currently.

mighetto

02-01-2005, 04:33 PM

Love the drawings. A 44 footer with a beam of 12' 3 inches? She is water ballasted right? Love the Twin Keel configuration. Most Mac26x owners sleep in the bow section. The double berth on this vessel looks acceptable. The Life Raft under the deck table implies she will sink when swamped, but perhaps not. A water tight compartment or two, or air in the water ballast tanks, might keep her floating if capsized. The boat does not need to plane. Her hull speed is fast enough to do close to if not double digits. (40 foot at the water line.) But the large engine compartment and inboard outboard configuration is very interesting. Does she? Does she plane under motor power? I assume the prop can be lifted from the water like an outboard. Looks like she has the trendy small head sail. That isn't so bad. It allows self tacking. But I think future yachts should take full advantage of roller furling. That implys a 140 or greater Genoa. The mast head rig is wrong. Fractional should be looked into. If you change the rigging to support a full Genoa and then put in a lighter mast and fractional rig, you have a shot at making this vessel a true upgrade possibility from the Mac26x. All designs out of Road Island are suspect but this improves the situation :)

You know the Mac26x is fit to go to sea. Nice drawings nonetheless.

Skippy

02-01-2005, 07:14 PM

Are these the most offensive of my comments? Would they be less offensive from others?They would be less frequent from others.

Skippy

02-01-2005, 08:36 PM

[Spaghetto], ... My view shows 5026 currently.There Frank, you got your food pellet. Now ya happy?

sorenfdk

02-01-2005, 09:03 PM

Remember that the halt in production of the X was not known until recently to have been related to Jim Teeters.
Frank, I ask you again: Who "knows" about this?

gybeset

02-02-2005, 12:04 AM

Brother, I call you brother, for you have been baptized by finding the Secrets of Yacht design and you appear to be from the town in which I was raised. The town of Tubby, of 18 foot Potters that sail accross the Pacific.

The URL above has been rigorously reviewed by sailnet.net (t shirts now available) by sailing anarchy (burgees now available) and by the MacGregor yacht's web sites. It is as accurate as such review can make possible. (Highly accurate)

It has not been reviewed by boatdesign.net.

Professional designers of boats are not unlike professional designers of churches. Both groups of designers are expected by their customers to be well researched in the history of the design of boats or churches.

However both groups have respectively formed circles where they hold each others hands. The circles are closed. Even to lessons from history.

We outside of the circle are anarchists. Amatures to be marginalized. Especially when we ask why. Like why water ballast (a form of ballast used through out the history of sailing) is not used more frequently in sail boat design or why should a boat sink when swamped. Or if canters were so great why were they not used until ten or so years ago?

Those of the circle value being part of that circle. They fear free thought and expression because it may result in exclusion, excommunication from a club, a politically-correct party, that is closed to all but those who think like they do. To all that think other than monohull or lead on a long fin.

We outsiders, we anarchists, have a new and powerful voice. The voice of the Internet. It is that voice which has brought you an others like you AT LAST to this forum.

The Church of FOYD is now open (Future of Yacht Design). Huzzah Hazzah, There is much work to do. May I suggest reading the TP52 thread and the special issue of Sail on the future of sailboat design. (pay attention to the advertisements) Be prepared to be saved.

The Mac26x has the most widely accepted and scrutinized movable ballast system in the world. Its hull shape is the most widely accepted shape for those that make a living from the sea. The work boat hull form is far from slow. To avoid hazards (like pirates) and to get to market in a timely fashion they just had to be and are fast under sail.

I encourage those who are in the circle and wonder why to get a new email address and join in the discussions. We value FREEDOM and can be free to speak our minds here. The URL mentioned will be updated. There is a lot more.

Oh: Seattle Boat Show Saturday.

pirates on the seas, no doubt unchristian, may theire grappling irons from their TP52's never score your topsides halelluelia brother, praise the lord (not DouG!)

SA'er

02-02-2005, 05:21 AM

Ahh looks like Spaghetto has reared his ugly head again......... Good luck fellas, this guy is nucking futs

Spaghetto, just want to let you know that you are a looser. lol, lol, lol You have no place on the water (or internet) and should be droped off in the desert and never alowed to return.

Regards
SAer and hope to never see you there again.... lol, lol, lol

mistral

02-02-2005, 07:15 AM

thank you Dreamer, at least someone who shows us what MAC26 are in the real world, not in Mighetto-land......

Fair wind (not on a Mac26)
Mistral

Skippy

02-02-2005, 08:35 AM

I can't believe how freakishly entertaining the last 4 hours of my life have been.For anyone who might be looking for a little additional fun:

A Spaghetto Entertainment Sampler!

A View from Across the Pond (http://www.ybw.com/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/507378/page/10/fpart/3/vc/1)

Ballerina Science
Lesson 1
... bringing the bulb weight closer to the hull makes the boat faster like bringing the arms of a twirling ice skater in makes the ice skater twirl faster. ... The better design is to just get rid of the weight on the fin and put it closer to or internal to the hull. (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?p=31761#post31761)
Lesson 2
... This internal ballast rule applies to everything that moves: cars, motorcycles, planes, power boats and yes - even sailboats. ... If you own a sailboat boat with a bulb contraption on a fixed fin, you own a boat with a correction to a design flaw. ... why don't powerboats have weight on long thin foils? ... why don't sailors hang anchor like stablizers on 100 feet of rode dangling from the centerline? ... (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?p=32461#post32461)
Lesson 3
This ... prevents multihulls from competing because the space between the hulls is a big hollow. The effect of the hollow, ... lifts the hull from the water at speed. (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?p=35036#post35036)

Trolling Anarchy
Stupidity and Lunacy PNW Style (http://www.sailinganarchy.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=2833)
Mighetto's new looney bin (http://www.sailinganarchy.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=5413&hl=)
Who killed Frank (http://www.sailinganarchy.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=9514&hl=)

Totally Precious, 52 weeks a year (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?t=5471)

The Troll Report
Installment 1 (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?p=35614#post35614)
Installment 2 (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?p=36370#post36370)

Design Anarchy(thru p.13, rated PG17) (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?p=34012#post34012)

Troll Humor (and IQ test)
Question: What did the movable ballast trained sailor say to the keel boat trained sailor?
Answer: Would you like fries with that order? (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?p=34281#post34281)

the Mac26X is related to hobies because they came equipped with Coleman ice chests (http://www.catsailor.com/forums/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=Test&Number=32431&page=16&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1)

"Incredible Secrets" (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?t=6106&page=1&pp=15)

"Paging Dr. Freud ..."
Zerr seems to be a psychology of fear behind zis sort of sinkink. Just below ze surrface, so too speek. Afterr awl, who vould vant to sail arround mit a big long duedel hangink down frrom ze hull? Mit awl zose dangerrous rreefs unt shoalss lurkink out zerr, who knowss vat might get chopped ofe? Betterr to keep ze "family jewels" safe unt sound inside ze hull, eh?
(INFINITE APOLOGIES TO ALL VOLKSDEUTSCHEN & DEUTSCHSPRECHER FOR MANGLING THE ACCENT/LANGUAGE SO SHAMELESSLY!!!!!!!!!!!)

SeaDrive

02-02-2005, 08:46 AM

Love the drawings.

Tanton's standard in drawing is perfection.

I thought I saw something yesterday that said 90 hp for 12 kts under power, but I can't locate it today. Since the design is from '93, I don't think you can call the rig proportions "trendy." The rig is carefully detailed for shorthanded sailing, and I will take Mr. Tanton's opinions over yours. Construction is Aluminum, and I doubt there is positive flotation. The water ballast would be in addition to lead in the keel(s). The protection of the cockpit is important in a real sea-going boat.

You know the Mac26x is fit to go to sea.

I know no such thing.

:)

dreamer

02-02-2005, 10:49 AM

mighetto

02-02-2005, 12:06 PM

dreamer

Mac 'n cheeze 26 Real World:

* A regatta of trailor sailors toured the Apostle Islands (not East Coast...not West Coast so no bitchin' there). The fleet consisted of your typical trailerable rabble: Catalina 22s (2), Precision 23, Potter 19 (2), Mac 26X. Everytime the fleet made port, the Mac was easily 1 hour behind. That was all taken care of when, in intense winds of 10...maybe 15 kts, the mast on the Mac 26 bent like an old q-tip right in the middle. According to the 'crew', the boat was rolling dramatically from side to side when the cheap-ass piano wire forestay snapped (pulled out of the 'fitting' on the end of the forestay which was some sort of pressed sheet metal number). The mast was so flimsy that they were able to repair it with...get this...duct tape! Didn't matter tho cause they motored back to the start and gave up (they no longer have that POS).

First ever report of a Mac26x dismasting. How can this be confirmed? Would the factory know? Oh the repair was made with duct tape. - good one. You had me going on that for a while. The Mac26x, owing to her engine, if not superior sailing ability, would always arrive first in a cruising fleet. 20+ MPH will git you 20 miles in an hour.

* We have 2 Mac 26Xs in our marina. One is a green slimer. The other is owned by an older guy. He goes out quite a bit. Never puts up the sails tho. Reason being, "too windy". Like Ghetto-boy, they too came from the stink-potter world. His wife likes the powerboat interior. She went out once with him...once. Now the only time she goes aboard is when it's in the slip. When he goes out, she heads over to the houseboat permanantly moored at the end their dock.

Well thats a damning review. The boat to own is the one your wife will cruise with you on. I know a similar owner. Something happened under sail. Something scared him. His wife is a sailor however, and she wants to go out on the Mac26x all the time. Her husband was so frustrated that she wanted to put the sails up on every outing that he bought her a sunfish. In time he will come around. This season he put in intermediate reef points. Beginners need not fly all the cloth.

I don't know anyone who takes these boats seriously. I think if I ran over one with my Baba I wouldn't even feel it.

True enough. We cruise frequently with a Baba 40. Her name is Murphy's Lawyer. She carries more head sail than all the cloth on Murrelet and does beat us. We also sail pass her on occasions.

But all of this is moot. Geheezer, I've been crusing BBSs since before you needed bifocals and I can attest that, without a doubt, you are the weirdest piece of fucked up fruitcake I've EVER come across. I can't believe how freakishly entertaining the last 4 hours of my life have been. Without question, CB has put up a valiant effort to 'ballast' your drivel (I owe you a cold one, CB buddy).

Hell, I want to buy Crank Boy a beer. We live in an owner driven world now. (Bush, just have to love him). Crank Boy needs his own boat. He shouldn't be spending his money on beer.

The only scary (notice one R in scary - which alludes to your mastery of the English language) part of this whole thing is when (not if) you corner some unsuspecting neophyte and fill their head full of your absolutely bizarro-world minutiae.

New to the sport purchasers certainly do find my material. I am confident that it is real scary to those with old fixed keel vessels (not Baba's your exempt) but thin fixed keel vessels with bulbs. My material is doing a great number on reducing the resale value of those sinkers. That and the fact that ocean insurance is so expensive for them. They need not read my stuff. Just contacting the insurance carrier will set them streight. The 30 to 37 footers are most susseptable to my posts. I do a public service to new to the sport purchasers in pointing this out. Do you really disagree? How does it go - the only thing that works on an old boat is the captain. I mean that offends even this owner of an old Mac26x. But when you can get a new Mac26m for the cost of a used 37 footer, you have to think.

I especially laughed when I saw that you posted the marina and slip where you keep your junk-o-la abomination. How often have you stepped in flaming bags of dog poo? Or maybe that plastijunk hunk has already been reduced to a molten glob at the bottom of the marina.

I have more faith in human kind than you do. This is why I was upset when given credit for the keel pocks on Tripp Gal's vessel where CB does his crewing. Her vessel suffered from electrolisis. This is something that happens when a boat or dock is not grounded properly. Mac26x vessels, have a mettle hanger that is in the water that might suffer as well but certainly the damage is insignificant to what can and does happen to fixed keels. Other Mac26 vessels have no mettle parts in the water.

Come by J19 Swantown and Murrelet any time. We are dog friendly. You will be reading about that in 48 north soon enough. Seriously, my wonderful wife has an article coming out in 48 north. It is all so Kewl.

PS it is cheese :rolleyes: Now tell me this isn't fun.

mighetto

02-03-2005, 03:44 PM

Very good summary Dr. Skippy. Here I was thinking I would have to google this nutball in order to get the whole enchilada. Now I feel enlighted. Well, actually I feel nauseous.
Kind of like eating a poorly cooked enchilada.
Get the whole enchilada at http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/murrelet.htm

One of my crew, on dog doo patrol, was told by an anarchist, or an affiliate, that the Mac26x rigging is to light. For those with lesser vessels, it may look so. However the telephone masts common on displacement hulls are totally inappropriate for boats that plane or surf. These telephone masts create a lot of wind resistance. They are thick because the hull is sucked into the sea the faster the displacement vessel goes and at some point, if the sailor doesn't reduce sail, the stresses on the mast become huge and dismasting is the end result.

On boats that plane or surf, the stress forces on a mast are much different. Rather than the hull being sucked into the sea the faster they go they crest the bow wakes. In gusts they break from the sea. Because of this the mast doesn't move faster than the hull which is the definition of a dismasting.

The shrouds and stays on light rigged vessels are like the strings on a guitar. It is not appropriate to upsize them. They are meant to stretch in ways that contribute to sail shape and prevent dismasting. It is very common for a keel boat sailor to give advise regarding shrouds and stays that is totally inappropriate for boats that are meant to take light rigging.

asathor

02-03-2005, 09:36 PM

I really don't think you can invent a new kind of science just because your boats rigging seems to be adequate. Windgusts that change the windspeed from 15 mph to 30 mph instantly (or worse) does the same to all boats even McGregors - nothing weighing that much can accelerate that fast. Take your favorite boat to Tiera Del Fuego and see for yourself.

That aside I can understand that you are quite happy with your boat. Sales show that many people like that boat. God for them and McGregor - careful marketing is usually rewarded by a better match between product, seller and consumers.

I am quite sure that I do not wan't to convert to the McGregor religion. I sail a Freedom but that does not mean that I am not convinced that Gary Hoyt is god. And my computer is not an Apple even Jobs is a much cooler Guru than Gates - I am to cheap and change things a lot so I settle for a PC with an abundance of different and usually cheaper software.

A McGregor 66 however could get my heart beating quite a lot faster than the average boat, your included, however my wife has woved to never live in a basement. So now what - should I loose the wife and get the boat? Heck good wifes are hard to come by - great boats are a dime a dozen in comparison.

Get real about that boat, in a few years it will be a money pit like all others. At best it is going to be like a bad marriage; you put money every month but it only gets exciting a few weekends a year.

I have had the same boat since 86 and plan to keep it. Why? Well, she over 18 now so I can take her out alone without mom coming along, and the wife doesn't even get jealous.

mistral

02-04-2005, 03:53 AM

The shrouds and stays on light rigged vessels are like the strings on a guitar. It is not appropriate to upsize them. They are meant to stretch in ways that contribute to sail shape and prevent dismasting. It is very common for a keel boat sailor to give advise regarding shrouds and stays that is totally inappropriate for boats that are meant to take light rigging.

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSS, come on Frankie, go on, give us another pill of wisdom YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS, i guess if shroud are guitar strings you claim to be Andrè Segovia :p :p :p :p :p :p :p
i hope those guys from Southern Spar or Sparcraft, who are using Nitronic and cobalt rods to have stiffer and lighter shrouds on racing sailboat don't read your speechs, they'll probably die from laughing :) :) :) :)
so streching the shrouds make better sail shape ?????? :p :p :p :p
Frankie, take your guitar back and play yourself a "Serenata", you really need it

mighetto

02-04-2005, 11:22 AM

asathor

I really don't think you can invent a new kind of science just because your boats rigging seems to be adequate. Wind gusts that change the wind speed from 15 mph to 30 mph instantly (or worse) does the same to all boats even McGregors - nothing weighing that much can accelerate that fast. Take your favorite boat to Tiera Del Fuego and see for yourself.

Wish I could take credit for Ballerina Science. That was a good one. Wind gusts from 15 mph to 30 mph instantly are not uncommon in my sailing area and on Lake Mead, which hosts Macgregor races. These are not going to break masts. But they will rip sails. MacGregor put Doyle sails on the Mac26x vessels and I suppose with age these may now be susceptible. In any case, a gust from 15 mph to 30 mph is the perfect opportunity to get the Mac26x on plane. They are that light even fully ballasted. I suspect Melges are the same way. With a planing vessel you fall off in the puffs instead of pointing into them. Unlike a displacement vessel, the planing vessel will reduce her heel when falling off in a puff as she goes from forced mode to planing mode. This single aspect - falling off in puffs rather than heading up, probably explains why the US Sailing trained are unable to sail a Mac26x. For them the boat truly is crap because their training is inadequate for a modern sailboat design.

That aside I can understand that you are quite happy with your boat. Sales show that many people like that boat. Good for them and McGregor - careful marketing is usually rewarded by a better match between product, seller and consumers.

You can not go wrong with a MacGregor. That is what I was told by a Catalina Loyal who purchased a Mac26d as a placeholder for a larger Catalina. The MacGregor Yachts company has a wonderful track record of providing yachts that hold their value. But you are incorrect about marketing. MacGregor Yachts does very little. Advertising is all by word of mouth. Folks (engineers) figured out that the Mac26x was likely a slightly bigger minitransat; they knew Roger was claiming the boat could do 17 MPH under sail, that he had been honored in the Sailboat Hall of Fame, and that he was claiming to sell a 40,000 boat for 18,000. A used minitransat will run something like 40,000. These claims just are not that hard to believe when you look at what data is made freely available to boat designers from the minitransats. http://www.xs4all.nl/~blvrd/html/design.html. The notion that the minitransates likely are compromised by design rules and that Roger MacGregor was not so restricted further supports pioneer owner's decision to purchase. Word of mouth then popularized the craft all over the world.

Contrary to marketers of lesser vessels, the Mac26x was portrayed as revolutionary and because of that she probably was not intended for first time boat purchasers. This notion is supported by the interiors. Boats targeted for new purchasers usually are done in earth tones, these colors appealing to young women and their husbands. The Mac26x has always been done in pastels. This attracts more mature prospects.

I am quite sure that I do not want to convert to the McGregor religion. I sail a Freedom but that does not mean that I am not convinced that Gary Hoyt is god. And my computer is not an Apple even Jobs is a much cooler Guru than Gates - I am to cheap and change things a lot so I settle for a PC with an abundance of different and usually cheaper software.

Don't you love the Microsoft staff and their IPODs. In your face Guru Gates. carbon fibre tapered mast? Yamaha 4hp long shaft outboard ? Cat Rig? Centerboard, Trailerable. 21 footer. Hats off to Gary Hoyt. Right up there with Roger MacGregor. No doubt about it. They are even in the same club.

http://www.sailamerica.com/halloffame/freedom40.cfm

A McGregor 66 however could get my heart beating quite a lot faster than the average boat, yours included, however my wife has vowed to never live in a basement. So now what - should I loose the wife and get the boat? Heck good wifes are hard to come by - great boats are a dime a dozen in comparison.

The best design is the design your wife will sail with you on. Mine doesn't like the Mac65 either. Deck Salons, such a nice new term for the "dangerous" pilot houses that get ripped off when the boat capsizes. It definately is nice to be able to enjoy the view from below decks while eating dinner. MacGregor Yachts points out that the Mac26x will out motor the Mac65. Family members like to be able to get there fast on occasion.

Get real about that boat, in a few years it will be a money pit like all others. At best it is going to be like a bad marriage; you put money every month but it only gets exciting a few weekends a year.

Oh on this I agree. For a maintenance free vessel, I spend 2 to 3 hours for each hour out there. The work is mostly in reconfiguring the vessel from race mode to cruising mode and in carting material to and from the vessel. I spend less time refuling these days. The money pit is in the electronics. I am convinced that you can double the cost of a Mac26x with all the electronics you want. We have radar, GPS, auto pilot but gad zooks there are fish finders, wind measurement gizmos, water speed gizmos, weather plotters, Wi Fi, EPRIB, microwave ovens. Argh now in color. At least with a Trailerable you can avoid the cost of a slip if you want. We keep ours in the water all year. It is about $300 per month to do so. We have a 30 foot slip. I have a Wallis Marine cooker whose blower needs fixing. There is often something broken. If its boating its fun not work. The Mac26x is suppose to be as maintenance free as possible. I think that is true. There are few boats where the interior can hosed down for cleaning.

I have had the same boat since 86 and plan to keep it. Why? Well, she over 18 now so I can take her out alone without mom coming along, and the wife doesn't even get jealous.

This is a great statement because it fits so well with the notion that it takes a life time to learn a craft well enough to sail her really well. My wife thinks I have to much fun sailing alone and it isn 't "fair" unless she tags along. But I have parked her at a resort and done some serious sailing with her watching from shore. Do you think a US Sailing trained keel boater capable on your craft? Would it not take years of unlearning before compentency let alone competitive sailing?

mighetto

02-04-2005, 11:51 AM

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSS, come on Frankie, go on, give us another pill of wisdom YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS, i guess if shroud are guitar strings you claim to be Andrè Segovia :p :p :p :p :p :p :p
i hope those guys from Southern Spar or Sparcraft, who are using Nitronic and cobalt rods to have stiffer and lighter shrouds on racing sailboat don't read your speechs, they'll probably die from laughing :) :) :) :)
so streching the shrouds make better sail shape ?????? :p :p :p :p
Frankie, take your guitar back and play yourself a "Serenata", you really need it

Don't know much about history,
Don't know much biology,
Don't know much about the French I took
Don't know much from Bethwaite's Book
But what I do know is that shrouds should stretch
and if they stretch as they are designed to do, what
a wonderful sail you will have.

La da da.. da da da

Seranata in the key of mighetto.

Seriously, we have the advantage of having Brian Toss, a rigger who makes his money by finding fools who have tightend turnbuckles beyond tune. Stretching the wire beyond recommended distroys the elastisity of the wire which really is meant to work like the string on a guatar. The shroud adjusters on the Mac26x, and Mac26m, are not only easier to work with, but they are also lighter and stronger and easier to see when replacement is necessary. Turnbuckels can be damaged and then made to look alright prior to the boat being sold. Brian will advise replacing all of them if you do not know the history of the used boat. Shroud adjusters have holes that you count when you have a good sail, note in the log and then use again when conditions are similar. The fact that they are less expensive than turnbuckles does not mean they are not better. How is that for a song. Can you dance to it? :)

I do like smilies. Keep up the good work!

Skippy

02-04-2005, 12:41 PM

I really don't think you can invent a new kind of science just because your boats rigging seems to be adequate.You know, that's an interesting point. The X's sail is so puny, it's never going to grab all that much wind. And as soon as it does get a gust or higher wind, the boat just heels right over and spills air. So there's nothing in the boat's design that will necessitate the heavier rigging. The boat just sits there, heels over, and capsizes. It's just like that T-shirt I saw once: "I don't have a drinking problem. I drink, I get drunk, I fall down. No problem!"

btw, our friends at SA have discovered that Frank is a tumor (http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/conditions/01/18/frank.tumor.ap/).

mistral

02-04-2005, 01:07 PM

mighetto

02-04-2005, 08:06 PM

You know, that's an interesting point. The X's sail is so puny, it's never going to grab all that much wind. And as soon as it does get a gust or higher wind, the boat just heels right over and spills air. So there's nothing in the boat's design that will necessitate the heavier rigging. The boat just sits there, heels over, and capsizes. It's just like that T-shirt I saw once: "I don't have a drinking problem. I drink, I get drunk, I fall down. No problem!"

btw, our friends at SA have discovered that Frank is a tumor (http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/conditions/01/18/frank.tumor.ap/).

David's parents had been auctioning off a bumper sticker reading "Frank Must Die" on eBay to raise money for the procedure. Skippy you are good. I spewed cola on that. Hoping David and all a great sailing weekend. :!:

mighetto

02-04-2005, 08:21 PM

it's simple, rigging is dimensioned regarding righting moment at 30° RM30, since MAC26 has a really poor RM30, is obvious that mast sections are light, that's all, no misteries, no strange ballerina math calculations, it's just a streight compromise design suited to cruise both with engine and sail in a very conservative way.

WoW, impressive sounding. A monohull that can be sailed at 17MPH is hardly conservative. This is how Roger MacGregor viewed the vessel when he was producing them. I quote

"Here are your sailing choices: (1) With the water ballast tank full and conservative sails, the 26x is an extremely stable sailboat, ideal for a beginner. (2) With the big Genoa jib or spinnaker, it is a conventional self righting sailboat with outstanding sailing speed. (3) Unballasted, it is one of the wildest and potentally fastest sailboats around. Under power (1) without ballast, it is a rather fast conventional cabin cruiser, or (2) with the water ballast, a docile, heavily ballasted power boat."

I suppose you have forgotten. THESE ARE NOT RACE BOATS. They are cruiser-racers. Revolutionary cruiser-racers. I can add that almost all the boats now sport Genoas and that compromise design is a term that in the modern age refers to a sailboat that can not both sail and motor well.

101

02-04-2005, 09:33 PM

pkoken

02-04-2005, 09:40 PM

Hey! I can't find the "Frank Must Die" bumper stickers to buy on eBay, can someone point me to the correct item#?

Maybe I should have looked for "Mighetto must die"?

Skippy

02-04-2005, 10:24 PM

http://www.brytrcorp.com/wst_page4.html

Wynand N

02-04-2005, 11:31 PM

Why us Lord.........?

SailDesign

02-05-2005, 07:54 AM

Wynand, you owe me a keyboard! This one's full of coffee..... :)

D'ARTOIS

02-05-2005, 11:41 AM

Frank, I have an idea :idea: . Why bothering around with that useless 50 hp creamwhipper. I have a 20 Mw gasturbine for you. Add wings to your Mcalfabet and you may fly too!

asathor

02-05-2005, 02:42 PM

By the way, did you know that someone got the prestigeous Darwin Award for strapping one of them to his Chevelle.

K4s

02-05-2005, 02:52 PM

Just a thought Frank,and please try to think it through,If shrouds are designed to stretch are they also designed to then shrink back too their original setting once the power is reduced after the gust?If not why are we not completely re tensioning our rigs after every sail,perhaps we're just lazy or perhaps you have made a mistake in your reasoning.
Sorry to all others in here,I have weakened and are helping to sustain this giberish,will try to stay away and watch this thread die as is the TP52 thread,when you refuse to answer it fades away.
K4s

DGreenwood

02-05-2005, 07:12 PM

After having attended a party of attorneys with my brother (he is one) and giving some poor soul, who said something stupid, a serious tongue lashing, my brother was clearly irritated with me. When I said "Whassup" he said ---"you know when somebody opens their mouth and their brains fall out on the floor, you should not feel compelled to run up and kick them". Good advice--- I never took it. Soooo...

Franks Fun Filled Fony Facts

Lets make a list...I'll start

#1 Riggers actually want rigging wire to stretch...it makes for a better performing boat.

DGreenwood

02-05-2005, 08:27 PM

#2 Lower ballast does not improve the stability of a sailing vessel...or did I misunderstand that one? I don't see how I could have?

frankofile

02-05-2005, 11:08 PM

#3 - Lift generated by the keel causes a boat to rise up.

#4 - Cod's head/mackerel tail is a fast, modern hull shape.

#5 - Slop in a centerboard housing creates a gybing board that improves pointing.

#6 - Bearing off in a puff, while beating, will cause the boat to flatten out.

#7 - The only purpose of a tiller is to facilitate cheating. (This was from the SA thread, I don't think it has come up here.)

#8 - The Mac26X is an etremely fast boat but doesn't often win PHRF races because it is penalized by having such a high handicap.

#9 - The Mac26X is superior to most modern designs, especially the TP52, for ocean crossings.

Etc, etc.

DGreenwood

02-05-2005, 11:31 PM

#10 Frank is actually a great unrecognized genius with a deep understanding of the world of physics and how they apply to this simpletons game of sailboat design. At some point in the future we will all awaken to the dawn of real sailboats whereupon we will take to wailing and flagellating ourselves for the abuses we have put upon the "Enlightened One"

asathor

02-06-2005, 12:52 AM

#11 Racing hulls are best made of flexible materials: A CB (Keel) that bends doesn,t break.

#12 Light boats are better because if you hit something it will not hit very hard or cause much damage.

#13 Water ballast is superior; because it's dielectric properties are similar to the water around the boat it causes less friction (enhanced by taking on matching local water as well).

#14 Square, tall hulls are better because they meet the water and wind head-on and repel them.

#15 If you drink your beer on the dock before you go racing you will not have to carry all that on the boat.

#16 The fastest hull shape is the barge because only one side of the boat touches the water.

#17 Retractable keels are the future because retracting it up into the boat reduces the boats displacement. Also by moving it to the lee side the hull will heel and the wind will slide over the top of the boat instead of hitting it square on.

#18 Down the road we may even see keels that you can lower further into the water - positioned deeper into denser water they will weigh less but have more power.

#19 Catamaran barges will soon be your first choise because the can hold enough solar panels to run a decent size electric motor or a fan to fillthe sails.

#20 Sailors always drink their beer before you go to bed so they don't wakeup thirsty.

mistral

02-06-2005, 02:44 AM

A monohull that can be sailed at 17MPH is hardly conservative.

we're all still waiting for you to demonstrate that.....
Mistral

asathor

02-06-2005, 10:39 AM

There are sales people frequenting this thread!

frankofile

02-06-2005, 03:22 PM

What do they sell?

asathor

02-06-2005, 03:38 PM

Hits or boats????

pkoken

02-07-2005, 09:14 AM

This is the BEST out of the one posted so far IMHO...

#13 Water ballast is superior; because it's dielectric properties are similar to the water around the boat it causes less friction (enhanced by taking on matching local water as well).

mighetto

02-07-2005, 10:44 AM

Phillip Kohen

#13 Water ballast is superior; because it's dielectric properties are similar to the water around the boat it causes less friction (enhanced by taking on matching local water as well).

13, the magic number. 13 times 4 is 54 (er 52). It takes 52 years for the Mayan Calendar to repeat itself. We are so lucky to have seen the Turkey Product TP52s being produced in our life times. Note - the thread lives. Excellent! This Edsel requires further corrective spin. Huzzah Huzzah

There certainly is an excellent discussion going on about canting keels today. But lets keep on focus. The fellow who designed spaceshipone knew he was onto something when those in the field reached consensus that his design was nonsense. This is the way of every breakthrough product.
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/fh359b.jpg
The notion that there could be a sailing vessel that a beginner could operate that could be configured for ULDB racing is such a breakthrough. That it could be produced at a cost one tenth of the consensus no less revolutionary than spaceshipone. Spaceshipone didn't need the tiles. Mac26x vessels did not need the heavy weighted keel. Both have shown us the future.

GOOD MORNING BOAT DESIGNERS

We leave the anarchists behind today.

mighetto

02-07-2005, 10:56 AM

There are sales people frequenting this thread!
You mean brokers. Here is the point that I am making apparently poorly. Well there are two. First, it is unusual for the broker to represent the manufacturer. In every case that I have looked at, the manufacturer specifically points out that the broker does not represent the manufacturer. Case in point. I had a broker tell me that if you wanted a shower you could not purchase a boat with solid flotation, you had to purchase a heavy sinkable deep keel boat to get a bilge deep enough to drain the shower. Can you see the manufacturer's head spinning over such a statement. It is the nonsense that brokers spew because they know that prospects remember only about 1/3 of what they are told. Those days are over because of the Internet. Today prospects can verify what the broker says with a click and post. The latest nonsense is that you can not get your new boat CE marked.

Second, every owner selling a used boat is a broker. Hence, is it surprising that my opinion might be found objectionable by owners of lesser vessels? My notions have been called nonsense for many years by those who would like my readers to believe that I offend everone. Even if true, the free expression of thought is viewed as a right. There has never been a right established that prevents one from being offended. There should be no new displacement monohull sailing vessels designed in the 30 to 37 foot range (that range is for planing motor boats) and monohulls should float when swamped just as multihulls do. If this offends the reader, so be it. Freedom of thought comes at the price of offending. The 30 to 37 foot displacement monohulls were acceptable in an age where all boats - even fast ones - could be expected to be caught in a storm during the life time of the boat. With modern reporting only thrill seekers and the incompetent can be expected to weather such conditions in the lifetime of the modern designed craft. Hence, those who continue to design new 30 to 37 foot monohull ocean sailboats limited to displacement speed, without making them tank like, are guilty of malpractice. How is that for a statement. No one will argue this. Well I predict no one will argue this with me.

mistral

02-07-2005, 11:36 AM

asathor

02-07-2005, 12:03 PM

+13
+13
+13
+13
_____
=52

To win a debate you must be believable.

I am not sure how much it would take to insult a Mayan, but I think a sacrifice is in order (no ketchup please).

mighetto

02-07-2005, 12:03 PM

Mighetto, What is the point here . . . are you just defending the MacGregor design or are you trying to state that the MacGregor design is the best? I am trying to figure out this thread . . . . I don't know if I can.
I defend my cruising log here. The thread is about myths debunked in my cruising log and the notion that the Mac26x is a baby killer. That later notion comes from a recent court case where a formerly well respected Naval Architect (NA) named Jim Teeters tried to shift blame for the deaths of two children from the drunken operator to the boat design. The reputation of Jim Teeters was ruined by his need to testify. Not only did a different NA (Taylor) testify that the boat could be operated safely but Teeters appeared to impeach himself by stating first that alcohal might be a contributing factor and then stating it need not have been. The judge even questioned his motivation for seaking to testify because all, judge, jury, even the family of the children viewed the case to be about drunken boating and not boat design. The operator got 7 to 10 years, the amount changing depending on who is posting. The Mac26x boat is no longer produced in the US, most now think owing to the case. Jim Teeters no longer holds his Director of Research position at US Sailing (probably owing to the case) and his efforts to promote TP52s through arguments likely used in the drunken boater's case failed. The Grand Prix Rule Working Party (GP RWP) rejected all Teeter's notions of stability calculations based on mathematics to which the TP52s were designed. It now appears that Jim Teeters needed court approval of his notions so that they would be persuasive to the GP RWP and the Mac26x, being a movable ballasted vessel, was the test case he chose to further vested interests in the design of the TP52s and smaller vessels with similar fixed weighted fin characteristics. Further impact of the Mac26x case likely is the demise of IMS and the rise of IRC in the Americas. IMS involves rules that boat designers can design to. This can cause the creation of foolish designs like the TP52s which are marketed as Transpacific vessels but in reality are buoy racers with characteristics making them not suitable for ocean crossing - characteristics like the SNAME capsize risk ratio which favor the Mac26x over TP52s for such work.

Boat designers are very lucky to have the TP52s and Mac26x cruisers. The Mayan calendar does not repeat itself except once every 52 years and these two boats are that kind of once every 52 year opportunity for boat designers to learn from. I seriously do not think it is my wisdom or ability to hold an audiance that draws readers. The success of the Mac26x and failure of the TP52 are just things that need discussion and if not discussed will result in another 50 years of stupid sailboat design.

asathor

02-07-2005, 12:24 PM

Mistral you must be a Democrat if you expect a debate to be rootet in facts, reality and evidence. (Democrats really don't get marketing, do they).

Gainsaying is much more effective today, all you have to do is repeat you statement a lot and people will start to believe you.

You are right though, there are a lot of places where boats of all kinds are welcome to race. There must be someone out there in a coastal PFHR fleet who has competed in their McGregor.

Maybe we should look at the owners association pages or at the manufacturers site. It's sure to be mentioned there. That would be a fun owners story that everyone who own one would like to read and talk about with pride. And the marketing people could show it to people and say: see we told you, this us the fastest monohull under 30'.

Fairytales are fun too, they are what dreams are made of. The web is a lot like that, one big fairytale mixed up with reality. Unfortunately some people believe everything that is said and written even if they have to say it themselves. The funny thing is that they are happy all the same (like in fairy tales).

mighetto

02-07-2005, 12:24 PM

+13
+13
+13
+13
_____
=52

To win a debate you must be believable.

I am not sure how much it would take to insult a Mayan, but I think a sacrifice is in order (no ketchup please).

First, this is not debate. In debate you are alowed to state falsehood and if the oponent is not smart enough to call you on the falsehood you score points. Lets not ever post what we know to be false here.

Second, and this is Mayan Zen, even 2 plus 2 equals 4 requires you to make an assumption. The assumption that your math is in base 10.

I think now we are lifting above the plateau. This is the first group to have gotten this far. Congratualations. I can not believe it. Look what happens when you leave anarchy behind.

mistral

02-07-2005, 12:26 PM

from Sailing Anarchy :
_________________________________
Honorable Mention:

There is simply no disputing the brilliance, in every facet, of the TP 52 class. The boats are phenomenal, the rule is solid and the number of boats is exploding. The TP 52 class is the best example of a proper big boat arena in many years. Take one look at the Farr designed Esmeralda and tell us that isn't nearly big boat perfection. Now let's see a TP 40, and a TP 70......
_____________________________________________________

are you really sure TP 52 are a failure???????

Mistral

mistral

02-07-2005, 12:34 PM

Fairytales are fun too, they are what dreams are made of. The web is a lot like that, one big fairytale mixed up with reality. Unfortunately some people believe everything that is said and written even if they have to say it themselves. The funny thing is that they are happy all the same (like in fairy tales).

i wouldn't dare to call Mighetto's speechs a fairy tale, would you????
i can just see a poor sailor claiming absurd statements, that's all!!!
i have a lier as a prime minister but i'm not proud of it, nor i think i have to lie to sponsor/sell a cheap compromise boat, that is MAC26, nothing else, not a babykiller, not a wonder of human craftship nor a amazing speedy sailboat. Just a cheap compromise boat to cruise without any need of performance.
That's why i'll never work in markenting
;)
Mistral

asathor

02-07-2005, 12:39 PM

His work has not gone unnoticed.

http://www.macgregor26.com/hall_of_fame_award.htm

As the 26x concept evolves it may qualify some day.

mighetto

02-07-2005, 12:42 PM

i'm still waiting......
come on Frankie it's so easy, take a GPS, a good steady wind day and astonish us all with Murellet's performance!!! Do you remember?? I expect at least 17mph, thast to say about 13.5 knots, as you claimed.
remember to take some picture.......
...and remember to switch your engine off......

fair wind
Mistral

First, Roger MacGregor has already done this. It is a fact that he has put this in print. The boat has been clocked at 17 MPH under sail. Second, I have confirmed 12 plus and Third, others have confirmed 17 MPH. The confirmed 17 MPH was posted on one of the macgregor yachts boards. The operator had a long down wind run. He was solo handling and fully ballasted. At the start of the run, he let loose the water ballast which drained - he was unable to confirm - fully. He left his fleet, consisting of multiple kinds of sailing craft, behind. Eventually an island blocked the wind partially and the boat slowed. The operator dropped his main, confirmed the boat was fully ballasted and sailed under head sail to the finish first. Plenty of witnesses. Very few owners doubt that in high normal wind the boat will do double digits ballasted. Why should this be so hard to fathom? The big difference in the design of this craft is the movable ballast. The kind of movable ballast that can be moved off the boat. There have been plenty of planing sailboats created that do double digits. 26 foot would be on the top end of those but with the minitransats, and Melges, not to mention multihulls, the claims are well within reason.

My suspision is that the keel boat trained have trouble because their training is to prevent planing rather than allow a lesser designed vessel to do so because that lesser designed vessel can be damaged while planing.

mighetto

02-07-2005, 01:07 PM

His work has not gone unnoticed.

http://www.macgregor26.com/hall_of_fame_award.htm

As the 26x concept evolves it may qualify some day.
I tend to think that it was recognition of the revolution being supported by Macgregor Yachts in the form of the Mac26x that got the Sailing Magazine writers who present the hall of fame award to give Roger the award for the Mac25. In January of 2000 - the time of the award - MacGregor Yachts was at the height of Mac26x production with 8 to 10 boats coming out daily. No other sailing vessel in this size was really competing successfully against "the concept" in the US and the vessel was being exported all over the world creating problems for those making monohulls in the 23 to 30 foot size everywhere. When this kind of thing happens folks have been known to PAY MANUFACTURERS NOT TO PRODUCE, which was a theory I held before finding out about the drunken boaters case.

The ability to make an even better concept is not disputed. The notion that the Mac26x should have a rotating mast like the mac26m has been a popular one.(though I think that would damage stability). Contrary to pervasive opinion, the mac26x did have a tall mast option available from Blue Water Yachts. However, there is something that the Mac26x has that can not be matched by any new concept. That is 5000 hulls in operation.

It will be a decade before that can happen in a vessel of her size, if even then. The Mac25 had 7,000 hulls over 14 years, I do not think 5000 were ever in operation at the same time. The number of hulls in operation increases the potential for informal one-design racing when two of like kind happen to find each other. Because of 5000 hulls only 500 owners will ever get their sails numbered and because of the 500 only 50 will actually race there is good reason to stick with at least the same hull and water ballast system. I suppose changes in fins, topside and mast could be carried to older hulls as the boat gets raced formally as a one-design. Well, why not?

mistral

02-07-2005, 01:29 PM

First, Roger MacGregor has already done this. It is a fact that he has put this in print. The boat has been clocked at 17 MPH under sail. Second, I have confirmed 12 plus and Third, others have confirmed 17 MPH..

ok so you have a amazing very fast boat, you currently do double digit downind, you get an incredibly high PHRF rating, you race (someone posted your results before in TP52 thread); These are all TRUE facts, you claim them too.
now just please explain why don't you outsail every other boat you race with???
maybe you're too generous and you want to share with them the joy of winning???
anyway i'm still waiting a snapshot of Murrelet in howling wind with foresail and your GPS clocking 17mph, and i guess i'll wait for the whole of my life;
MAC26 official site is not exactly what i'd call an impartial source of data for their boat, this is just marketing!!! there's not a polar diagram, wich will be a good issue to start evaluating boat's overall performance, nothing at all, no sharp informations about wind conditions, wave conditions, just "17mph downwind"; ok Frankie, i'll throw my old city car down from a high cliff, then i'll go around claiming "hey guys, my car reached 200mph, it's great, isn'it!!!!!"

mighetto

02-07-2005, 01:35 PM

i wouldn't dare to call Mighetto's speechs a fairy tale, would you????
i can just see a poor sailor claiming absurd statements, that's all!!!
i have a lier as a prime minister but i'm not proud of it, nor i think i have to lie to sponsor/sell a cheap compromise boat, that is MAC26, nothing else, not a babykiller, not a wonder of human craftship nor a amazing speedy sailboat. Just a cheap compromise boat to cruise without any need of performance.
That's why i'll never work in markenting
;)
Mistral
Even a poor sailor can confirm what the manufacturer puts in print. If the statements in print are absurd then they would not be verifiable on the water. The Mac26x hull design is 8 years old and this hull has become very popular. These hulls have the most widely accepted and scrutinized movable ballast systems in the world. Once rare, it is now common to spot these boats all over the US and especially off the coast of California where the run to Catalina Island (an ocean crossing in my book) is specifically mentioned in the brochure. I claim to be an expert on this boat by nature of having the most time on the water and owing to my willingness to discuss the vessel critically. A cheap compromise boat would not outlast all of us. This is the claim made by the manufacturer. He claims the vessel will outlast all of us. Mine has been in salt water for almost 6 years now. Original everything. The engine is fully depriciated. The sailboat has actually apreciated in value. The folks with remorse are the ones who sold thier Mac26x vessels. Do you not see this in your area of the world? But I love to chat about the marketing.

Take the TP52. In my opinion, marketers of the TP52 created a website called Sailing Anarchy to promote these vessels. For three years the vessel was hyped. I couldn't open a sailing magazine without seeing what I now view as paid-for-content articles. I even imagined handlers following the posts of those who might question the concept of a TP52. Contrast with the Mac26x. Dealers avoided the Internet. MacGregor Yachts hardly bothered defending the vessel. They did market her as revolutionary. Not everyones cup of tea. Word of Mouth created demand that is still exceptionally high. But you can only get new ones in Austrailia. Roger MacGregor doesn't work in marketing either. You should love the guy.

mistral

02-07-2005, 01:44 PM

He claims the vessel will outlast all of us. Mine has been in salt water for almost 6 years now. Original everything. The engine is fully depriciated. The sailboat has actually apreciated in value.

hey Frankie, don't joke, even a hard raced dinghy can hold on tight 6 years properly cared, you still know nothing about how much your boat will last, get back in 2020 and maybe you'll know what you're talkin' 'bout.
Anyway cheap doesn't mean easily degrading, cheap means low cost material, for me it's a point of honour not a shame, nothing to hide, just a consequence af a designer's choice; i wouldn't use epoxy, kevlar nomex and carbon on a normal family cruising boat!!

Mistral

mighetto

02-07-2005, 02:01 PM

[mistral]

ok so you have a amazing very fast boat, you currently do double digit downind, you get an incredibly high PHRF rating, you race (someone posted your results before in TP52 thread); These are all TRUE facts, you claim them too. now just please explain why don't you outsail every other boat you race with???

Well, 50 year old sailors do compete in the Olympics. So it is not my advanced age. You may or may not be a PHRF racer. The idea of PHRF is that even the slow boats should win their share of races. So having a fast boat means diddly in terms of the wins that should be expected. Does that make sense? The other notion of PHRF is that local conditions favor boats differently. So Lady Katie Too! out of San Diego was rated 215 for fully ballasted operation but that doesn't apply in other sailing areas. Lady Katie Too! stopped winning races with that rating and the restriction of fully ballasted operation. Truth is the boat is not racable unless raced as designed which means moving the water on and off the boat during a race. Only PHRF-NW has implemented a water ballast protocol that allows us to do that and this is the first racing season with that protocol. It changes everything. doesn't it.

maybe you're too generous and you want to share with them the joy of winning??? anyway i'm still waiting a snapshot of Murrelet in howling wind with foresail and your GPS clocking 17mph, and i guess i'll wait for the whole of my life;
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/wow2.jpg
She is in forced mode here. Fully ballasted. We definately did double digits on the down wind run. Winds were reported gusting to 30 knots.

MAC26 official site is not exactly what i'd call an impartial source of data for their boat, this is just marketing!!! there's not a polar diagram, wich will be a good issue to start evaluating boat's overall performance, nothing at all, no sharp informations about wind conditions, wave conditions, just "17mph downwind"; ok Frankie, i'll throw my old city car down from a high cliff, then i'll go around claiming "hey guys, my car reached 200mph, it's great, isn'it!!!!!"

I read a Dilbert that reminds me of the above. Wally made a report to his boss where it was clear that he had accomplished little but his report was that he had more than met expectations and had earned a raise. His boss - the pointy haired fellow - said he had not met expectations and would not get the raise. Wally said - well you can not prove that because to prove it you would have had to have given me written objectives and you do not do that. I get the raise anyway.

MacGregor Yachts set some very high expectations with the Mac26x vessel. You want that kind of thing from your manufacturer. Then they put those in writing. Yes this is a form of puffery. I do not disagree But it is still a fact that the expectations were set high and they are being met. 5000 owners are not wrong. But I suppose you can wait longer. Just try to see. I suspect you are trying not to. No amount of time will help you to see in that case.

mistral

02-07-2005, 02:10 PM

mighetto

02-07-2005, 02:32 PM

Frankie, i'm not Russel Coutts, but that snapshot was taken in 10-12 knots of winds, 15 knots to be generous, sea is quite flat. And it was the old one that you showed us in TP 52 thread, remember when we laughed saying "Hey guy, ten knots of wind and a reef in!!!!!"
I can't believe you haven't any more impressive shot of your rocket boat !!
Mistral
Yea, same shot. They had it displayed at the boat show in Seattle. I do not disagree. The notion of 30 knot gusts had me scratching my head as well. But it is true that sails were blown out and a boat wiped out in the same race. The photographer asked me about my reefing in the conditions. I told him it was lunch hour and I needed to cook the soup. :) It is also true that in 10 to 15 knot winds the Mac26x actually sails FASTER when reefed. The owner's manual so states. The main is reefed at an intermediate point which is not the stock configuration, in the prior photo. We have found this intermediate point key to sailing in what we call hang glider mode which is a mode of sail fully ballasted that even a beginner can use to achieve planing speeds in normal wind without motor assistance. This makes a mast head style of sail similar to the Mac19. I think the Mac26x mast already to tall for normal wind. In high normal a lot of wind is spilled in the top fraction for example. It is handy to have that extra fraction in light conditions however.

http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/raceday.jpg

These are pocket rockets in every sense of the words. But I doubt I have come close to even 40 percent of what is possible in them. Anyway, lets chat about stability. Specifically the CG and CB. I have to work late tonight, so how about doing that in say three hours. I should have the preparations for tonights work done by then and who knows, I might be on this computer until midnight depending on how quickly things go.

mistral

02-07-2005, 02:39 PM

i'm working on Pc too but, as I'm working, i think i'll have to shut down mozilla and concentrate on my work :-(((

mistral

pkoken

02-07-2005, 02:44 PM

Mighetto wrote: where the run to Catalina Island (an ocean crossing in my book)

Sorry Frank, having made the journey back & forth, around & sideways to Catalina island I can say two things...

#1 - Depending on your point of departure and sea conditions it's a 20 mile jaunt across a channel. For me sailing from Dana Point it was closer to double that.

#2 - I have seen a lot of strange and innapropriate craft at Two Harbors & Avalon, but never have I seen a Mac26x~ Hobie cats? Yes. Catalina 22? Yes. West Wight Potter? Yes. Sailboarders in Avalon? Yes. Mac26x No.

If a Mac26X made it to the island, I am willing to bet it was by motoring across in the early morning calm seas (something a powerboat is good at).

My final point is that if you believe sailing to Catalina Island is an ocean crossing you are beyond crack-smoking and well into general insanity. Please post your address so I may dispatch the nice men with the 'special' Mighetto jacket for you.

mighetto

02-07-2005, 04:19 PM

pkoken

Sorry Frank, having made the journey back & forth, around & sideways to Catalina island I can say two things...

#1 - Depending on your point of departure and sea conditions it's a 20 mile jaunt across a channel. For me sailing from Dana Point it was closer to double that.

Pillipe,you have no reason to apologize. I have been to Catalina a half a dozen or more times myself and have yet to spot any kind of MacGregor. Now you are not telling me you haven't seen Mac26x vessels at Dana Point are you? I have seen several there. Where do they go - Catalina Island is the answer. The manufacturer has made a big deal out of making that a destination for these vessels.

"Many areas have those wonderful sailing spots that are just out of reach! Here in Southern California a favorite spot is Catalina, an island about 25 miles off the coast. Getting there and back has always taken most of a weekend. You can be sure that sailors will use the dual nature of the 26x (motor and sail) to shorten the distance. After a short, fast commute across the channel in their power cruiser, they can spend the weekend sailing from cove to cove and anchoring for the night. Maybe they will even stay Sunday night and speed back at dawn on Monday. You can't do that in a conventional sailboat. If you have a favored place that is just out of reach for a conventional sailboat, consider the 26x."

#2 - I have seen a lot of strange and innapropriate craft at Two Harbors & Avalon, but never have I seen a Mac26x~ Hobie cats? Yes. Catalina 22? Yes. West Wight Potter? Yes. Sailboarders in Avalon? Yes. Mac26x No.

There was a nice Catalina 22 photo at Avalon last year. Looked very cool. A fellow on the Mac boards claimed to have taken a personal water craft there. Was never able to confirm that they have the range for that.

If a Mac26X made it to the island, I am willing to bet it was by motoring across in the early morning calm seas (something a powerboat is good at).

Perhaps. You like to think of this boat as a power boat. But The hull and constuction are pure sail boat and they certainly can plug along with the Catalinas and Potters in afternoon blistering winds (did you not see the photo). But lets face it, the boat can not carry the fuel a power boat does. The designer didn't make a bayliner power boat here. The motor is the primary safety feature and the range of the vessel under engine power alone just long enough to avoid hazards predicted by weather reports. But the engine is still the secondary power source.

My final point is that if you believe sailing to Catalina Island is an ocean crossing you are beyond crack-smoking and well into general insanity. Please post your address so I may dispatch the nice men with the 'special' Mighetto jacket for you.

I have seen that to-Catalina stretch of water in a state I would wish no small boat in. The crossing is hazardous because in shallow water winds can whip up waves that are steep. The Mac26x was made to handle that if she has to. Every Island off the coast of California has been visited by a Mac26x. They are that worthy. In any case. Travel agents call a trip from Miami to the Bahamas an ocean crossing. I like my special jacket in black not white. Send the nice men with smilies :) :rolleyes: :cool: and :p

Now tell me this isn't fun. Did you really let go of a Catalina 27? I wouldn't have done that.

frankofile

02-07-2005, 04:30 PM

Mighetto wrote: where the run to Catalina Island (an ocean crossing in my book)

Sorry Frank, having made the journey back & forth, around & sideways to Catalina island I can say two things...You can understand how Frankie got this wrong though. I mean, it is in the ocean with swells and large sea creatures and all, and on a hazy day you can be out of sight of land for a large portion of the trip... pretty scary if you don't know wtf you are doing. Not to mention all the pleasure, commercial, and military shipping traffic you've got to watch for and dodge around!

mighetto

02-07-2005, 04:35 PM

You can understand how Frankie got this wrong though. I mean, it is in the ocean with swells and large sea creatures and all, and on a hazy day you can be out of sight of land for a large portion of the trip... pretty scary if you don't know wtf you are doing. Not to mention all the pleasure, commercial, and military shipping traffic you've got to watch for and dodge around!
Look blame Roger Macgregor for building OCEAN sailboats and nothing other. The facts of life are that global circumnavigators report having the most trouble off the coast of California. It is notorious. Granted, things are getting calmer past Santa Barbara going south. Ocean swells are no big deal in a small sail boat. It is boats that are larger that have trouble with them.

frankofile

02-07-2005, 04:44 PM

The facts of life are that global circumnavigators report having the most trouble off the coast of California.Put down the crack pipe Frankie. Idiot.

mighetto

02-07-2005, 04:49 PM

Put down the crack pipe Frankie. Idiot.
I am burning rubber and laughing gas - just like starshipone. Doesn't mean I am wrong. This is breakthrough technology we are chatting about. That it could appear simplistic, even idiotic, is the halmark of sound engineering. :)

Hey I am having way to much fun. Kewl it please! ROTFLMAO.

sorenfdk

02-07-2005, 05:55 PM

The success of the Mac26x
What success? It is out of production!

and failure of the TP52
What failure? Almost everybody agrees that the TP52s are the most exiting thing that has happened in sailboat racing during the last couple of years. Almost all of the rock stars of sailing have raced them and loved it. Even Russell Coutts plans to sail on one this year!

sorenfdk

02-07-2005, 06:00 PM

I tend to think that it was recognition of the revolution being supported by Macgregor Yachts in the form of the Mac26x that got the Sailing Magazine writers who present the hall of fame award to give Roger the award for the Mac25.
Yes of course - why didn't I see this before! They wanted to recognize Roger MacGregor for the Mac26x, so they presented him with an award for the Mac25. That makes sense!

sorenfdk

02-07-2005, 06:03 PM

The facts of life are that global circumnavigators report having the most trouble off the coast of California. It is notorious.
And those who might be just a little afraid of the Southern Ocean are just whining kids who know nothing!

sorenfdk

02-07-2005, 06:10 PM

Remember that the halt in production of the X was not known until recently to have been related to Jim Teeters.
Frank, I ask you again: Who "knows" about this?

pkoken

02-07-2005, 06:22 PM

And those who might be just a little afraid of the Southern Ocean are just whining kids who know nothing!

Perhaps they wouldn't be scared if they were sailing a Mac26x... In any case, regardless of your boat~ Cape Horn has nothing on Point Conception and the DEADLY COAST OF CALIFORNIA!!!

sorenfdk

02-07-2005, 06:34 PM

Perhaps they wouldn't be scared if they were sailing a Mac26x
No, they'd be too stupid to be scared!

mighetto

02-07-2005, 06:53 PM

Søren Flening

I don't understand your question? Sorry. Who could be those who have read my stuff. Let me give you this to chomp on. Consider it halfed baked but please consider it.

A former Alaska Airline aircraft maintenance engineer and Mac26x owner has been helping me with this. He has been doing work on Mac26x vessels so they will support larger outboards. Folks want that for reasons I can not understand. Let me start with how MacGregor Yachts taught us to think of stability as it relates to the Mac26x.

The notion presented is of one of those punching toys. You know the clowns that you punch and they right themselves. That is how we are to think of stability on the Mac26x. I do not own such a toy but I do have a beach ball and I have run this experiment in the hot tub. If I tape a weight, even a small one, to the bottom, and turn the ball upside down it will always right itself - even with the jets of the hot tub turned full up.

So the report that the Mac26x righted herself in a test pool when plunked upside down doesn't surprise me. But this notion is met with disbelief by those trained by US Sailing. The centerboard even retracted is not going to change the result. This has to do with the shape of the cabin top. It isn't flat enough to provide inverted stability. As long as the boat has the weight of the ballast tank structure and yes even motor where it is she is going to right her self even without water ballast. Unlike lesser designs, the Mac26x has not one but two compression poles. So having the deck salon ripped off by sea action doesn't appear to be a possibility.

So how does the idiotic training of MacGregor Yachts compare to the confused consensus of naval architects and sailboat designers?

Here we are to recognize that torque called the righting moment (RM) is related to the boat's displacement. This is definitional. The displacement multiplied by the horizontal distance between the Center of Gravity (CG) and the center of buoyancy (CB) is the definition of righting moment. That horizontal distance is called the righting arm (CZ).

With that recognition, we are to see that the more displacement the greater the righting moment. Then we must accept the notion that a boat's heeling angle can be pulled past 90 degrees.

Eventually as the boat is pushed past 90 degrees, the CG and CB will come into vertical alignment as they are when the boat is at rest right side up. This is the point where the righting moment is zero and it is called the Limit of Positive Stability (LPS).

Now comes the assumption: Everyone assumes that once the LPS is reached the boat will invert and stay that way until wind or wave action push it right way up. But this isn't true with the most seaworthy of shapes, those being the sphere and the log. It is only true with shapes that have until recently been sailboat shapes. The shape of the top deck of the Mac26x and Mac26m makes that assumption incorrect.

It is similar to when 2 + 2 no longer equals 4 because we are no longer working in base 10.

All those nice curves showing the angle in degrees against the righting arm suddenly lose their predictive value. We can no longer predict just from math when a sailboat will invert and stay that way or even that it ever will.

It takes 120 lbs at the top of the jib to hold a Mac26x on its side with the mast parallel to the water. Unballasted with sails up, it does not appear that the Mac26x can turn turtle. When plopped upside down with no sails she rights herself. Completely filled with water she rights her self and can even be sailed (though not fast).

Of course there is still capsize risk. In sufficient sea, all boats can capsize. Nonetheless, this vessel, when capsized floats and the hatches are positioned that except by wave and wake action they can be left open without water entering the interior. That would be operator error however. I really want to see the Teeters video now. The conclusion I come to is that you can get stability (the ability to stay right side up) by adding displacement to a traditional looking sailboat, or you can get stability with additional flotation (buoyancy) on a boat shaped like a Mac26x or m. CG or CB this is the question. With CB you get the benefit of boats that when swamped may not sink as well as a faster sailboat when there is light wind.

frankofile

02-07-2005, 07:25 PM

The notion presented is of one of those punching toys. You know the clowns that you punch and they right themselves.That's how I think of you, but I'd hardly call you stable.

mighetto

02-07-2005, 07:29 PM

Perhaps they wouldn't be scared if they were sailing a Mac26x... In any case, regardless of your boat~ Cape Horn has nothing on Point Conception and the DEADLY COAST OF CALIFORNIA!!!
Cape Scott has had the largest waves recorded and I have rounded Cape Scott in my Mac26x. Several other Mac26x cruisers did so earlier and even Mac26 Classics have done so. This is all about waiting out the gales and storms and rounding with the knowledge that modern reporting provides. The relevant knowledge including current and slack water times as well as high water and weather and season. Even a battle ship will change course when the going gets deadly.

mighetto

02-07-2005, 07:35 PM

That's how I think of you, but I'd hardly call you stable.
But you love me anyway right :?: Blame Roger Macgregor

"A ballasted sailboat is very much like the inflatable toy with a weight in the bottom that kids use as punching bags. The weight makes the toy return to vertical after it is poked."

Roger MacGregor didn't allow himself to become part of the group grope consensus building mentality currently characterizing naval architects and boat designers in the US today. He has an army of sailors now trained to think correctly rather than by concensus. These are running the PHRF and major races now explaining why you have things like IRC and movable ballast taking hold. Soon the buoy race courses will be returned to Olympic style. Just a few more years. We don't want to push to fast. It is great to sail in modern times. :rolleyes:

FranksaDork

02-07-2005, 07:46 PM

[QUOTE=mighetto]http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/wow2.jpg
She is in forced mode here. Fully ballasted. We definately did double digits on the down wind run. Winds were reported gusting to 30 knots.

So Frank, explain this to me. If you were doing "double digits" on that race, how come if the boat I was on never got past 7.5 knots, you finished roughly 3 hours behind us on a 12 mile race.

Edit: Excuse me, a 15 mile race.

mighetto

02-07-2005, 08:02 PM

[QUOTE=mighetto][IMG]She is in forced mode here. Fully ballasted. We definately did double digits on the down wind run. Winds were reported gusting to 30 knots.
So Frank, explain this to me. If you were doing "double digits" on that race, how come if the boat I was on never got past 7.5 knots, you finished roughly 3 hours behind us on a 12 mile race.
Edit: Excuse me, a 15 mile race.
Dork, were you on a planing sailboat? If you were on a displacement sailboat, you would not have exceeded hull speed. Did you record 30 knot gusts? The story I have is Dynamite.

The committee boat failed to look to the east as I was screaming to last place finish. She pulled anchor after the boat I was racing for last told them she had not seen me. The boat that use to be called Sea Witch came from the West. I watched the committee boat pull anchor in daylight but figured they wanted me to blast a finish horn when I crossed where she would have been. We both got to harbor at about the same time.

You will recognize that the finish was close to the no wake zone. So no motoring fast was involved. Note:

I could have taken ANY TIME I WANTED after the boat I failed to catch because the committee boat left a half an hour early. It was a great race day. The only way I could have come close to catching the next to last finisher was planing speed. Unbelivable I know. You know the boat. Why not confirm with them when they tied up and when then noted I was in harbor.

The time meant little to me since I was last. But if this ever happens to you know that there is no defense for the committee boat. When it leaves before its time you get to take ANY TIME YOU WANT in the order of finish. Had I done so, I still would have finished last because I owed the boat that finished right before me time. Now you make me think I should have protested. Let it go. And

excuse me - admit it, you saw me on J-dock same time cleaning up when you were didn't you? Does 3 hours behind you really make sense? How about half that time?

sorenfdk

02-07-2005, 08:05 PM

I don't understand your question? Sorry. Who could be those who have read my stuff.
I have read your stuff, and I don't know that the production of the Mac26x was stopped because of Jim Teeters. I just know that you have stated this as a fact without coming up with any evidence.

With CB you get the benefit of boats that when swamped may not sink as well as a faster sailboat when there is light wind.
Oh Frank - where do you get it from? It's hilarious!

pkoken

02-07-2005, 08:08 PM

http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/wow2.jpg

Look at this boat! Sailing with a reef in and there isn't even a whitecap on the water- Gusting to 30 knots my ass! You are looking at maybe 10 knots of wind here...

sorenfdk

02-07-2005, 08:13 PM

http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/wow2.jpg
She is in forced mode here. Fully ballasted. We definately did double digits on the down wind run.
Didn't you see the "." between the two digits?

mighetto

02-07-2005, 08:28 PM

I have read your stuff, and I don't know that the production of the Mac26x was stopped because of Jim Teeters. I just know that you have stated this as a fact without coming up with any evidence.

Oh Frank - where do you get it from? It's hilarious!
I do the best I can. This is what I know. The only boat produced by MacGregor Yachts at the time of the children's deaths was the Mac26x. The last run of a boat as successful as the Mac26x was 14 years. The X was in year 7 of production at the time of halt. The company had just placed an advertisement in a publication for new boat purchasers for year 8 and it was a new advertisement, not a rehash of an old one. I personally was told that the X would be produced with the Mac26m when I viewed hull number 5 of the M roll off the assembly line .The manufacturer, prior to the X had always produced more than one boat. The day after my visit the factory was closed to visitors. The company did not raise the price of the X to slow demand prior to carting off 4 mold sets capable of at least 800 new Mac26x boats, according to the factory representative Bill. The notion that 911 caused business insurance to rize so high that production of the X was halted is hilarious. But this was kicked about for some time. It is hilarious because of the world wide distribution of the product. 911 would have little to do with international demand. The notion that buisness insurance would be raised after a paid for number had been produced (5000) and that that insurance price raise is related to Jim Teeters and by association US Sailing's objection to the design fits. From this businiss man's perspective the halt in production was directly related to Jim Teeters involvment in the 2002 July 4th drunken boater's case. This fellow from Alaska Airlines was the first with the theory. Apparently, in the transportation business this kind of thing is common. The notion has been widely accepted on this forum. Only Roger MacGregor would have proof and he isn't talking. Makes you think that perhaps legal action against Teeters and US Sailing is contemplated. But I have no indication of that. Why is this important to you?

FranksaDork

02-07-2005, 08:32 PM

Didn't you see the "." between the two digits?

My eyesite isn't as good as it used to be. :)

Frank. The highest gust we clocked was 22. That picture was taken around Hunter Point (squaxin in the background). We passed you about 2 miles before you even got there. You hadn't even rounded the island yet. 3 hours sounds about right. And no, I wasn't on a boat that saw you at "J" dock. I was in the bar and had dinner and numorous drinks when we saw you motor by (once again, about 3 hours later).

frankofile

02-07-2005, 08:50 PM

It seems pretty clear that ol' Frankie doesn't even know what planing is, let alone know when he is on a boat that is planing.

mighetto

02-07-2005, 10:12 PM

My eyesite isn't as good as it used to be. :)

Frank. The highest gust we clocked was 22. That picture was taken around Hunter Point (squaxin in the background). We passed you about 2 miles before you even got there. You hadn't even rounded the island yet. 3 hours sounds about right. And no, I wasn't on a boat that saw you at "J" dock. I was in the bar and had dinner and numorous drinks when we saw you motor by (once again, about 3 hours later).
Dork. Cool. As this story gets older and older, I will be coming in at midnight and the gusts will be clocked at 60 MPH. But Dyno will still be AWOL. Seriously, I could have taken anytime I wanted for the finish. There isn't a bar or diner place at Swantown any more. You must have seen me motoring from a perch at Tugboat's. In which case you have damn fine eyes. Anyway it is all about stories. Yours is as good as mine at this point. And I am not complaining. The photo was the prize that day. And Murrelet appears to be screaming in the photo. I was approaching Hope Island enjoying the rest of you set out your spinakers. Naturally I was last. I have a trouble with starts. But I had passed at least one vessel prior to reefing. The boat is capable if not her crew. If I had had a camera ready the photo to take was Strider. Identify yourself and a beer is yours tomorrow night. :)

mighetto

02-07-2005, 10:17 PM

It seems pretty clear that ol' Frankie doesn't even know what planing is, let alone know when he is on a boat that is planing.
Lets go over this once again. The MANUFACTURER DEFINES PLANING. This is a word that is made up by the manufacturer. The definition of planing that is used by Melges will be different than that used by MacGregor. On a MacGregor, however, we have advantage in that we know what the wake looks like when planing under motor power. But 12 MPH is definately planing. We can split hairs over if 7.5 MPH or 9.5 MPH is planing but not 12 MPH. Not on a boat that is 26 foot.

Well, I have to quit for the night owning to the need for a network administrator who will not be available until the morning. Will see some of you tomorrow. Frank free day tomorrow on this forum. Enjoy.

pkoken

02-07-2005, 10:31 PM

Naturally I was last. I have a trouble with starts. But I had passed at least one vessel prior to reefing.

And the boat you passed looked like this, right?

http://www.yachte.com.au/classes/images/optimist-boat.jpg

tranmkp

02-07-2005, 10:36 PM

its pointless. please. dont feed this individual...

FranksaDork

02-07-2005, 10:42 PM

And the boat you passed looked like this, right?

http://www.yachte.com.au/classes/images/optimist-boat.jpg

Hey. Ain't that kid planing? :)

pkoken

02-07-2005, 10:44 PM

Hey Look! He raised the centerboard and CHANGED THE DISPLACEMENT of his vessel!

Maybe if he changes the displacement enough his boat will just lift off the water and float away into the sky...

mighetto

02-07-2005, 10:46 PM

Is that an el toro? We pass sail boats all the time. It is this fact that indicates my sailing compency is the issue and not the boat. Then the victems may or may not pass us later. I have some photos of vessels I have passed under sail. But I chose not to share those. Their captains know who they are. My wife and I are seriously considering building a little boat similar to your photo. They have a build program at center for wooden boats. Build a Boat - Test a Marrage. Something like that. The cost went from 800 to 1100 just recently. They must have added some counseling.

mighetto

02-07-2005, 10:48 PM

its pointless. please. dont feed this individual...
How would you know. You are a wimp ;) Post or prepare to be boarded. Sorry really have to go. But it is great to know there are party folks this time of evening. I do miss onefatdiva.

pkoken

02-07-2005, 10:58 PM

How many of the boats you pass are anchored versus the amount just standing still?

asathor

02-07-2005, 11:44 PM

Apparently x26's are all over the place. Sorry about doubting.

CT 249

02-08-2005, 12:44 AM

Yeah, I know I shouldn't feed the moron troll, but this is *&^%$#@ing way over the top even by Frank's standards.

"Lets go over this once again. The MANUFACTURER DEFINES PLANING. This is a word that is made up by the manufacturer. The definition of planing that is used by Melges will be different than that used by MacGregor."

No, you hopeless case, the manufacturer does NOT define planing.

Planing is a naval architecture term. A boat is planing when its centre of gravity rises above its static centre of gravity, due to dynamic lift generated by boatspeed.

MacGregor cannot define planing. The only reason MacGregor uses "planing"` in a different manner than Melges is because MacGregor seems to be dishonest while Melges know the truth.

Lies, lies, and more lies, Frank.....just as usual. Do you know the meanings of truth and honesty?

:confused:

sorenfdk

02-08-2005, 05:16 AM

I do the best I can. This is what I know.
If it is what you know, then why do you write a sentence like this: "The Mac26x boat is no longer produced in the US, most now think owing to the case." (Italics by me)?

Why is this important to you?
It all has to do with your credibility and your way of turning your personal beliefs into universal truths.

frankofile

02-08-2005, 09:37 AM

Frank is a clown and a buffoon. He destoyed his own credibility with his very first post in the TP52 thread. You can't read that gibberish and take anything he says seriously.

Skippy

02-08-2005, 10:55 AM

Spaghetto: The MANUFACTURER DEFINES PLANING.

McGregor also defines the term "17 MPH". :)

mighetto

02-08-2005, 06:54 PM

CT 249

Yeah, I know I shouldn't feed the moron troll, but this is *&^%$#@ing way over the top even by Frank's standards.

"Lets go over this once again. The MANUFACTURER DEFINES PLANING. This is a word that is made up by the manufacturer. The definition of planing that is used by Melges will be different than that used by MacGregor."

No, you hopeless case, the manufacturer does NOT define planing. Planing is a naval architecture term. A boat is planing when its centre of gravity rises above its static centre of gravity, due to dynamic lift generated by boatspeed.

Sounds good to me. A boat is said to be capable of true planing when the displacement/length ratio is under 150. The math shows that both the X and M vessels are capable of breaking from displacement speed and reaching a true plane. The X is significantly better at planing; her D/L is 137.59 vs the M's at 145.61. It probably will take abnormally strong wind (20 knots perhaps) for the M to plane fully ballasted where that potential in the X is evident in 12 knot winds, perhaps less depending on the point of sail. The X has a planing Dribbly style hull form. The M has more of a traditional rounded River sailboat form.
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/macXplane.jpg
The marketing material cover picture for the X (above) shows her on plane; no wave form is visible on her length. The M, (below) while cooking in good wind, is at displacement speeds as indicated by the wave form on her length. She is also being sailed at a noticable heel, more like a traditional displacement sailboat. These two pictures portray a vast difference between the sailing styles advanced in the two at-first-glance similar powersailers.
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/macMdisp.jpg

MacGregor cannot define planing. The only reason MacGregor uses "planing"` in a different manner than Melges is because MacGregor seems to be dishonest while Melges know the truth.

Glad you said "seems to be dishonest". Because that is the appearance we are addressing. One definition of truth involves consitant. Hence a Baptist does not visit the Galapagos Islands because what he or she will view there is not consitant with church teaching. The same is true with the sailing religion. Your training is not consistant with the notions I, really Roger MacGregor present. MacGregor Yachts defines the X as a planing sailboat. MacGregor Yachts defines the M as a surfing sailboat.

Lies, lies, and more lies, Frank.....just as usual. Do you know the meanings of truth and honesty?

I only post what I believe is truth. Honestly. Lets try to come to a happy place. The manufacturer gets to define what is a "planing sailboat" and what is a "surfing sailboat". How is that? NAs get to define planing.

mighetto

02-08-2005, 06:58 PM

If it is what you know, then why do you write a sentence like this: "The Mac26x boat is no longer produced in the US, most now think owing to the case." (Italics by me)?
It all has to do with your credibility and your way of turning your personal beliefs into universal truths.
The universal truth about the internet is that arguing credibility is a waste of time. I could claim to be Robert Perry and you might be unable to verify that was not the case. Hence it is best to concintrate on what is said. What is correct about that and what is incorrect. Do you really believe that Jim Teeter's didn't have anything to do with the halt in Mac26x production? If so why not just say so? No one cares to defend this man. Not even he cares do do so.

pkoken

02-08-2005, 07:17 PM

Sounds good to me. A boat is said to be capable of true planing when the displacement/length ratio is under 150. The math shows that both the X and M vessels are capable of breaking from displacement speed and reaching a true plane. The X is significantly better at planing; her D/L is 137.59 vs the M's at 145.61. It probably will take abnormally strong wind (20 knots perhaps) for the M to plane fully ballasted where that potential in the X is evident in 12 knot winds, perhaps less depending on the point of sail. The X has a planing Dribbly style hull form. The M has more of a traditional rounded River sailboat form.

So according to your logic Frank, if I cut a plank so it matches the D/L ratio of 150 or less it is a planing sailboat? There is more to making a planing sailboat than some magical displacement to length relationship... maybe the ability to carry enough sail to generate the power required to GET ON PLANE!?! Sadly the Mac26x does not have this sail area, and if it did it would not be able to carry it in a breeze as is clearly shown in your "10 knots & reefed" photo you have posted so many times.

asathor

02-08-2005, 08:01 PM

This is what the sea may look like at about 40Mph wind.

The owner of the boat in front has not yet fully recovered.

First he got beaten by a TP52 (see above) and now this.................

frankofile

02-08-2005, 09:03 PM

The marketing material cover picture for the X (above) shows her on plane; no wave form is visible on her length. The M, (below) while cooking in good wind, is at displacement speeds as indicated by the wave form on her length. She is also being sailed at a noticable heel, more like a traditional displacement sailboat. These two pictures portray a vast difference between the sailing styles advanced in the two at-first-glance similar powersailers.Ha ha ha! My god Frank you are so dumb! Could you have brainwashed yourself? Has memorizing sales brochures robbed you of the power to think?!? Other than a couple minor differences, those boats are the SAME. They are going about the same speed, at practically the same angle of heel, and they ARE NOT PLANING. They both clearly have bow wakes a foot or so back, and certainly neither one has risen above its static position. If anything the X has a more pronounced bow wake than the M.

Wow, that was pretty darn funny. Tell us another good one!

pkoken

02-08-2005, 09:08 PM

Maybe MacGregor has defined sailing at (far less than) hull speed "Planing"... This would make sense as apparently in the land of Mighetto manufacturers get to make their own definitions for their marketed material.

By the way, my motorcycle has 2366 horsepower when I push it up to 45k rpm... I am the owner I say it is so in writing here in this forum!

pkoken

02-08-2005, 09:11 PM

sorenfdk

02-08-2005, 09:19 PM

http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/macXplane.jpg
The marketing material cover picture for the X (above) shows her on plane; no wave form is visible on her length. The M, (below) while cooking in good wind, is at displacement speeds as indicated by the wave form on her length. She is also being sailed at a noticable heel, more like a traditional displacement sailboat. These two pictures portray a vast difference between the sailing styles advanced in the two at-first-glance similar powersailers.
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/macMdisp.jpg

Frank, I think you by mistake posted the wrong pictures (just as you did on your webpage), because these pictures show no difference in neither wave system nor heel angle.

gybeset

02-08-2005, 09:29 PM

Turds

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think it was Ted Turner that said to a designer about the 12mtr ?Mariner's?
stern "even a turd is pointy at both ends"

Spaghettos powerboat with a mast is not turdshaped, like a powerboat it is like a turd cut in half.

Rule to know

1. turds are fast (slippery by design) like a watermelon seed
2. conversely to have no turd characteristics may be slow !!

Am I exhibiting Spaghetto-like logic, should i stop reading his design secrets NOW ??

sorenfdk

02-08-2005, 09:31 PM

Do you really believe that Jim Teeter's didn't have anything to do with the halt in Mac26x production? If so why not just say so?
As I wrote in an earlier post: I don't know if Teeter's testimony had any influence on the halt in Mac26x production. Neither do you - it's just pure speculation!

No one cares to defend this man. Not even he cares do do so.
Most everything you have posted here (and elsewhere) is BS, so there's no need for Teeter or anyone else to defend him!

pkoken

02-08-2005, 09:35 PM

skinny boy

02-08-2005, 10:47 PM

So where is the magical reference that says that D/L of less than 150 means a boat is a planing boat?

According to the Annapolis Guide to Seamanship there is no such claim. The following link also seems to indicate under 90 D/L defines a planing boat which means the poor Mac26x does not qualify to plane so sad to see the mighty fall at the whim of a pen. Surely all these guys are just conspiring to keep the Mac 26x down.

http://www.sailbuyersguide.com/articles/boatpages/ComparingTheRatios.cfm

Of interest to you also should be the math behind the following.

"Another point of differentiation between coastal cruisers and true passagemakers can be readily seen by the side view showing the area (A) above the water to that of (B) below the water. The lower the ratio, A/B, the better. While true oceangoing fishing trawlers have A/B ratios under 2, it is difficult for a yacht with adequate accommodations to achieve this. It is P.A.E.'s opinion that oceangoing passagemakers should strive for A/B ratios of between 2.l and 2.7. It has been found that many popular "trawler styled" boats on the market today have A/B ratios in excess of 4, making them inadequate, if not dangerous, for offshore work."

The Mac26x comes in at a whopping 6! By the standards of powerboat and sailboat design it is considered inadequate, if not dangerous, for offshore work. So both industries think the Mac26x just doesn't make the grade. As they say the math doesn't lie, only Franky does.

frankofile

02-09-2005, 12:21 AM

Thanks for posting that link Skinny Boy - good for a quick review of the basics, eh? The entry for D/L for example does not relate directly to planing, so it's not surprising that Frank constantly refers to it in that context. Instead, it relates to the wave drag of the non-planing hull.

Anarchist

02-09-2005, 03:39 AM

Just for Spaghetto's knowledge this boat is plaining. Those shitboxes pictured are far from it.The reason why there is as you say it 'no wave form is visible on her length' is because it is going f@cking slow.

mistral

02-09-2005, 03:52 AM

It probably will take abnormally strong wind (20 knots perhaps) for the M to plane

YEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSS, have you ever heard about REALLY strong winds????
I guess no Frankie, since you never lifted your ass from the marina's restaurant!!!!!
:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)
20 knots is definitively not an abnormally strong wind FOR A SAILOR, is a decent steady wind :) :) :) :) :) :)
Frank you're totally absurd, do all us a favour, light your MAC's stinking engine and drive (not SAIL) away from this thread

Mistral

Anarchist

02-09-2005, 04:41 AM

Upto 38 knots of wind and 14ish knots of boat speed on this run.

Bull 9000 on a run between Sydney Harbour and Pittwater 2 on board with full main and number 3

CT 249

02-09-2005, 05:33 AM

"A boat is said to be capable of true planing when the displacement/length ratio is under 150."

Bulldust. The boat also has to have a decent hull form and plenty of stability and sail power; the Mac does not have these characteristics.

"The X has a planing Dribbly style hull form. The M has more of a traditional rounded River sailboat form."

Frank, you fool; I know you're regurgitating Frank Bethwaite. Mate, I first sailed with Frank Bethwaite about 20 years ago, I own and sail and win trophies in a Dribbly type hull (Tasar). You're a whacked out loon if you believe the Mac is anything like a Dribbly hull form.

"The marketing material cover picture for the X (above) shows her on plane; no wave form is visible on her length."

No it doesn't, fruitcake, it shows a boat sooooo slow (as confirmed by its PHRF and your own performances) that it's not moving fast enough to kick up a wash. And waves ARE visible on planing boats.

"Your training is not consistant with the notions I, really Roger MacGregor present."

Look, idiot; I lived 300 yards across the water from the place where the Dribbly was born (Middle Harbour, Sydney), the club of your hero Frank Bethwaite, whose excellent writings you dishonour by daring to link with your idiocy and your crappy boat. I've sailed 18s* with Julian B, sailed HSPs and Tasars and B14s with Frank. My dad created the first chine skiff to win a title, he was one of the sailors who introduced lightweight self-bailing chine boats and trapezes to skiffs. It's a culture where as a kid you delivered papers and talked boats to the designer of Australia II; where people threw new ideas in Moths around and then built them over winter; a culture that created the first foiling Moths, the fastest skiffs, many of the best cat sailors, the fastest maxis. Some of us here come from training in skiff types, Moths, windsurfers, and other boats that are capable of performance you couldn't think of in your wildest wet dreams.

That's the training Anarchist and others here come from. What I learn from this training is that your notions are indescribably ** incorrect; the ravings of an ignorant pissante seeking desperately in his heart for some sort of lunatic way to validate his total lack of success as a sailor....and, from your repeated lies, lack of honesty, lack of integrity, lack of research and lack of the courage to admit your mistakes, I assume you have a similar lack of success as a human being.

Don't insult us here with your ravings.

"MacGregor Yachts defines the X as a planing sailboat. MacGregor Yachts defines the M as a surfing sailboat."

Stuff 'em, they're liars.

** Only once or twice I hasten to add.

** They're indescribable 'cause I've been out drinking after the twilight windsurfer race and cant' write properly any more. Sorry.

Gee, writing that was quite enjoyable. And we had a great race and a good time in the pizza place afterwards. Good times.

mistral

02-09-2005, 05:48 AM

chapeau (hat off) to Anarchist picture and to CT249 comment, great way of sailing and talking!!
38 is really a huge amount of wind!!!
20 knots is an ideal gamefield for all sailboats from dinghy to cruiser.

Mistral

sorenfdk

02-09-2005, 07:00 AM

CT249: You said it!

asathor

02-09-2005, 07:18 AM

:D How about a cup of coffee :) , lightly salted ;) ... and pass the DRY jerkey :!: .

I am waiting impatiently for the ice to go out :cool:

D'ARTOIS

02-09-2005, 08:09 AM

PRESS RELEASE

"Today, I have received the latest MC26alfabetX design, that cannot only power and sail, but can also be adjusted to measure, as math will prove.

In this particular mode, I am fully equipped to match against any maxi in the world, grace to the special inflation pump design that came just with the boat to inflate my boat to a maxi size. When raced, I just release the airvents and back she comes to her original design length.

As math proves, the boat will plane by just engaging the 300hp gasturbine that comes with the boat. As you may observe from the strong wake she leaves, the boat's gasturbine is working.

According to Melges, and proved by math, I have the fastest boat around!" :D

mighetto

02-09-2005, 10:46 AM

Let us convene the Church of the Deluded & Idiotic...

First order of business is to promote our (sole) congregation member Frank Mighetto to chief ArchBishop, head voodoo priest-king-of-the-highest Huzzah, Huzzah!
Let us open the Church of FOYD (Future of Yacht Design) instead. Chief Idiot Frank Presiding. Remember Fat Tuesday is over. It is Ash Wednesday. May I suggest giving up the character assassinations for Lent? Now from the well of souls - er soles :) - you know the TP52 thread. Our opening prayer:

Hi Andrew,
I work with Catia every day. I'm curious why you feel it is not a good boat design software? Also, just so you know, this question is for my own education, Not to support any of Frank's notions about sailing.

Scott, has been holding back all these years! Thank the Lord that he has found a voice. Perhaps this idiot me will be able to speak more softly in the future. I hate being a ball hog.

The Mac26x was reported to have been Catia born. She is said by dealers to be the most symetrical of all the yachts produced by the company and by the former Ford Aerospace employee Roger MacGregor, because once one side was drawn out on Catia, the mirror image was used for the other.

Scott and I happen to live in the area where the BMW/Oracle AC boats are being built. I just returned from Sedro Wolly where the mold sets are being created. The layup is also to be done in area, at Anecortes. Sedro Wolly is a community well known to motor cyclists on the Cascade Loop, a scenic highway Loop in Washington State. It is full of Tar Heals (like me - I am a native of North Carolina) and is near "Gods Country" in the film This Boys Life. It is also close to Aircraft manufacturing facilities working on composits. Great place for Yamahas as well as BMWs. :)

I was there for the Upper Skagit Bald Eagle Festival and to visit a sick crew member. Very tight lipped these AC boat designers. But you can feel the energy already. There are reasons to give what I post at least a small amount of analysis. Just the place in which I sail is dominating the boat design and build efforts in this (US) nation. Huzzah Huzzah indead! Was it not grate to hear those words prior to the superbowl.

mistral

02-09-2005, 11:01 AM

:?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?:
too much whiskey for Frankie :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?:

Mistral

frankofile

02-09-2005, 11:08 AM

Character assassination? You don't have character Frank, you are a character. You're a moron.

mighetto

02-09-2005, 11:10 AM

:?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?:
too much whiskey for Frankie :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?:
Mistral

Rum, Mount Gay of course. The Kiss Me Arse Syndicate has a new sponsor! The happenstance regarding Scott's delivery of free alcohal last night need not be gotten into. Lets just say the Lord was at work and wanted Mardi Gras well observed. Where are my beads?????

mighetto

02-09-2005, 11:16 AM

Character assassination? You don't have character Frank, you are a character. You're a moron.
On the level of President Bush (known in Canada as a moron), I hereby accept the nomination. Even a moron can serve as a messenger.

Graham, the sailor of Dove, which is portrayed as a Ranger 23 in the film, is alive and well and living in Montana. He is sailing Thistles today, still married to the same sweetee. Happy Valentines day Lover. Lets not think of massacres :D

frankofile

02-09-2005, 12:14 PM

The Mac26x was reported to have been Catia born. She is said by dealers to be the most symetrical of all the yachts produced by the company and by the former Ford Aerospace employee Roger MacGregor, because once one side was drawn out on Catia, the mirror image was used for the other. Well, according to you, dealers don't represent the manufacturer. But maybe what they were really saying, if your head had not been so full of shit that you couldn't hear straight, was that the other boats MacG made were even worse piles of crap.

The Kiss Me Arse Syndicate has a new sponsor! So you think you speak for for Team Kiss Me Arse now, eh? What, did Guy LeDouche finally stop boning Mrs. Frank and hire you back on? I doubt it. He seems to have a lot of fun with her.

Leave religion and politics alone - there are enough problems in those sphere's already. Show us more pictures of what you think planing is. That's always good for a laugh.

skinny boy

02-09-2005, 03:01 PM

Frank thinks he speaks for Team Kiss Me Arse, MacGregor, MacGregor dealers, SSSS and the West Coast. Probably also thinks he speaks for dead people and on certain Tuesdays God.

Wynand N

02-09-2005, 03:08 PM

pkoken

02-09-2005, 03:55 PM

Here it is! A definitive proof that the Mac26x is indeed a "PLANING" hull design-

PLANING
http://www.macgregor26.com/powering_dale_large.jpg
Note the use of the ENGINE to achieve a planing condition. Perhaps 17 mph could even be reached eventually...

NOT PLANING
http://www.macgregor26.com/genoa_beating_windy_pt_fermin_large.jpg
Note the fact that under a (modestly sheeted) 130% genoa this boat is ready to bury the lee rail even without a significant amount of wind. One must wonder if the total sail area is in fact overshadowed by the giant exposed topsides...

pkoken

02-09-2005, 04:04 PM

Here are some examples of PLANING hulls

http://www.northsailsod.com/class/melges/melges.jpg

http://www.northsailsod.co.uk/gallery/m24worlds2002/13.jpg

http://www.jonoknight.com/yachting/images/gauchoplaneds.jpg

PLANING*** (***MacGregor Yachts Definition of "Planing")

http://www.macgregorsailboats.com/images/main2.jpg

frankofile

02-09-2005, 06:11 PM

mighetto

02-09-2005, 07:06 PM

Frank thinks he speaks for Team Kiss Me Arse, MacGregor, MacGregor dealers, SSSS and the West Coast. Probably also thinks he speaks for dead people and on certain Tuesdays God.
No, no that is President Bush that has conversations with "The Father Up There". I quote MacGregor, I speak for MacGregor Yachts at the same Level as a MacGregor Yachts dealer - meaning not at all, SSSS has nothing to do with my posts on this topic, and I do not appologize about having a west coast tude. All of us Sailing Anarchists have that. Team Kiss Me Arse is my syndicate. Granted I have lost track of the French Man on J Dock. But he always turns up eventually.

mighetto

02-09-2005, 07:19 PM

my favorite photo of a Mac26x is this shot from the deck.
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/ak.jpg
Now tell me you would take those planing race boats up the Alaskan Inside Passage. This has been done now by more than a handfull of Mac26x boats. Get real. You are compairing cruiser racers to day sailing racers and ocean race boats. Well perhaps that is not so far off. Keep up the good work. Anarchists are welcome, as are all at the Church of FOYD. The church is now closed. However, please carry on without me. Oh, I have to prepare for what looks like a breezy passage. If you do not hear from me by Tuesday of next week blame Hunter sailboats and not MacGregor ones. The manufacturer has defined the X as a planing sailboat and the M as a surfing one. Take that for what it is or is not and be happy all.

Murrelet
casting off

mighetto

02-09-2005, 07:33 PM

Gentleman, you just never learn. :confused:
This little bit of advice as a concerned friend :)
"Never argue with an idiot, he'll drag you down to his level, and beat you with experience. To top that, a stranger passing by might not be able to tell the difference between you"
South Africa was rumored to be producing a Mac26x knockoff. Can you confirm? In my sailing for idiots book no one is arguing here. Constructive critizism and funning and some sparks of insight. Please join in.
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/foilbob.jpg
The above is the rudder for an I-14. The owners association decided not to go like the moths you are discussing elsewhere have, though that is also possible for an I-14. Think of the rudder as if it were an outboard. The same horozontal fins you find on ski boat outboards are evident on the I-14 fin pictured. The manufacturer doesn't like this kind of thing on Mac26x boats. But owners have run them that way. Planing under sail at lower speeds would be the result (assuming the prop had been removed). The lifting and tilting hydrolics are already part of the boat.

Do Stars plane? Stars will be racing PHRF-NW boats in the same events this season. The results of the races will be noteworthy.

mighetto

02-09-2005, 08:00 PM

Phillip, those are some great shots, but I'm afraid they show that you haven't been paying enough attention. The blue boat in the first set is actually is a Mac26M, not an X, and has completely different sailing and motoring characteristics from the X. Therefore no valid conclusiong can be drawn regarding the X ;).

You can always tell a 26M from an X by the double wrap-around sunglasses on the cabin. Stick around and you'll start to learn these things!
What an informative post. Thanks, Frankofile. I obviously am not needed all the time. Others can take the ball and score. The Mac26M and the Mac19, the first power sailer, share many similar characteristics including the double wrap, the companionway, the fule lockers, the rudder brackets, and the V shape rear hull. This is the Mac19
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/FM25.JPG
What I think is possible is that MacGregor Yachts had put the Mac26m concept together before the Mac26x concept. In otherwords before the company drew out the Mac26x, the company had drawn out the Mac26m to appeal to those who might have owned a Mac19 or Mac26d and wanted something more advanced combining features from both. The M is an evolution in other words. This to be compared with the revolutionary design of the X which would require a different sailing style.

frankofile

02-10-2005, 12:54 AM

What an informative post.Not surprised you think so.

Anarchist

02-10-2005, 01:41 AM

South Africa was rumored to be producing a Mac26x knockoff. Can you confirm? In my sailing for idiots book no one is arguing here. Constructive critizism and funning and some sparks of insight. Please join in.
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/foilbob.jpg
The above is the rudder for an I-14. The owners association decided not to go like the moths you are discussing elsewhere have, though that is also possible for an I-14. Think of the rudder as if it were an outboard. The same horozontal fins you find on ski boat outboards are evident on the I-14 fin pictured. The manufacturer doesn't like this kind of thing on Mac26x boats. But owners have run them that way. Planing under sail at lower speeds would be the result (assuming the prop had been removed). The lifting and tilting hydrolics are already part of the boat.

Do Stars plane? Stars will be racing PHRF-NW boats in the same events this season. The results of the races will be noteworthy.

Hey fuckwit Frank,

This rudder system for the I14 does not induce plaining. The boat will be already plaining with its light weight plaining hull travelling at speed. These foils are used to change the pitch of the boat into a more nose up possition when pushing hard and are only used when the crew is as far back as possible and still needs to get the bow higher. If used in light winds it will cause drag and thus the boat will be slower.... The rudder case can be pivoted back ie bottom of the rudder moves more aft to change the angle off attack. Wen you turn up wind you pull the line controling rudder pitch and bring the rudder forward again.

The foils on the rudder are ALLOT bigger than those found on outboards. Also a yacht is too heavy for this system to lift the bow. All it will cause is drag......... And if you think any different you are a complete idiot....... ohh thats right we have already established that :D

mistral

02-10-2005, 02:10 AM

Think of the rudder as if it were an outboard. The same horozontal fins you find on ski boat outboards are evident on the I-14 fin pictured.

AGAIN, Frankie, YOU DID IT AGAIN!!!!
they're not the same roizontal fins, that's YOUR problem, and most of all of MAC26, ski boats and Moths have SLIGHTLY different weight to lift, do you konw what "weight" means Frankie????
i guess no.....

Mistral

sorenfdk

02-10-2005, 03:32 AM

I have had some problems with attachments, but if everything went OK, you should be seeing a picture of a planing Mac26x. What you don't see is the rig. I guess the owner realized that the Mac is not a sailboat and decided to get rid of it...

mistral

02-10-2005, 05:29 AM

somenone 's beginning to use this boat for what is suited to do: motoring!!!
next step: throw away those unuseful rudders, remove those ugly stanchions and lifelines and palace a modern stainless pulpit, get a good flying bridge and enjoy your motorboat!!!

Mistral

mighetto

02-10-2005, 11:16 AM

Hey fuckwit Frank,
This rudder system for the I14 does not induce plaining. The boat will be already plaining with its light weight plaining hull travelling at speed. These foils are used to change the pitch of the boat into a more nose up possition when pushing hard and are only used when the crew is as far back as possible and still needs to get the bow higher. If used in light winds it will cause drag and thus the boat will be slower.... The rudder case can be pivoted back ie bottom of the rudder moves more aft to change the angle off attack. When you turn up wind you pull the line controling rudder pitch and bring the rudder forward again.

The foils on the rudder are ALLOT bigger than those found on outboards. Also a yacht is too heavy for this system to lift the bow. All it will cause is drag......... And if you think any different you are a complete idiot....... ohh thats right we have already established that :D
A infamous idiot - eh? We are literally in fog this morning.

http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/murrelet2.jpg
The I-14 rudder pictured yesterday, complements of Richmond Point Yacht Club, as is the Murrelet II, is mostly used apparently in keeping the bow of the boat from a nose dive. You are correct. It is not the primary source of lift. The horizontal foils are trimmed by pushing down the cap lever on top of the rudder at the appropriate time. We are fortunate in the Olympia Washington area in that the Columbia river is but a few hours away. The Gorge on the Columbia is believed by some to be the most active sailing area in the world even overtaking the sailing areas in your country. I do not buy into that but I do suspect it is the most active in the US.
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/tplane.JPG
The above is the Tasar, which you will find also on the Columbia River. However, these are from the Worlds when they were held in the Straits of Juan DeFuca. (40 foot waves caused a semester-at-sea vessel to return to port there last week.) The Tasar is the dinghy I believe most resembles the Mac26x in planing mode. If you buy into the notion that Tasars plane then you should recognized that the Mac26x does as well. It is not the kind of jump to warp speed thing that the Melges and I-14 folks get. The planing mode is entered in a less dramatic way and your crew may not notice that you have gotten to this third mode of sailing. But you will see double digits on your GPS.

The pioneer owners of the Mac26x apparently experimented with horosontal foils on the outboards which are lifted and dropped by hydrolics.
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/encl1.jpg
The above vessel followed those pioneers, in spite of the manufacturer adding a special safety warning to the owners manuals. The engine manufacture did not consider the small horosontals an issue. Plus, many X owners had already adopted the long used by prior model owners of blowing out the ballast with raft inflators so that you were confident it was empty. This is what Macgregor Yachts says:

"Do not install a lifting hydrofoil on the cavitation plate of the outboard motor. These are airfoil shaped wings, offered in various sizes and shapes. Their purpose is to provide lift at the stern of the boat. This raises the stern and forces the bow down, allowing the boat to get up on a plane more quickly. If they do keep the boat level when coming up on a plane, the ballast tank may not drain completely when the boat is underway. You may think you have an empty tank, but you may not. These hydrofoils create another problem when the boat turns or leans sideways while underway. The lift that they provide goes straight up the centerline of the outboard motor, adding a strong force to promote further leaning or capsize. These devices can exert a large amount of force; enough to snap off the cavitation plate that is cast as part of the drive shaft housing. Avoid them."

The Mac26x boat plains at speed undersail without lifting hydrofoils on a deployed outboard. The early model rudder brackets were substantially reinforced by 1999 because these rudders are lifting foils and do that job. You can see the stainless steel brackets on the photo of the Wind. Well kind of. One day I will find a pre 1997 Mac26x with the first generation brackets. They were reinforced likely owing to the mechanics of planing under sail. The rudders are not deployed when motoring at speed. Under sail, these foils do gradually change the pitch of the boat into a more nose up possition when pushing hard. You are instructed to move the crew is as far back as possible to get the bow higher. A high bow reduces the length at waterline which decreases the displacement hull speed meaning that you are into forced mode at a lower speed than would be indicated by math. By moving the crew forward, the Mac26x crests her bow wake and is plaining. Sustained planing mode is not at all difficult.

In light winds, the outboard hydralics would have the lower unit out of the water entirely so any lifting hydrofoil would not will cause drag and thus make boat slower.... I do see your point. On the I-14 you state The rudder case can be pivoted back ie bottom of the rudder moves more aft to change the angle off attack. When you turn up wind you pull the line controling rudder pitch and bring the rudder forward again. Outboard engin lower unit lifting hydrofoils do not have that level of tuning. But I think there is possibility for assisted planing without turning the engine on. When the X is in forced mode, instead of moving crew forward you might be able to adjust the bow attitude and crest the bow wave to reach plane. Perhaps you are correct and the horozontal fins need to be larger. This is just fun chat. I do not intend to do a modification like this. It appears that MacGregor Yacts is concerned more about the transition from ballasted to unballasted state than other issues. What do you think?

mistral

02-10-2005, 11:32 AM

i may seem boring, but i'm still waiting for a MAC26 planing picture, i mean with engine off....
This thread is becoming really boring :-(((

Mistral

mistral

02-10-2005, 11:49 AM

mighetto

02-10-2005, 11:51 AM

i may seem boring, but i'm still waiting for a MAC26 planing picture, i mean with engine off....
This thread is becoming really boring :-(((
Mistral

OK, Mistral. I have not had much luck with my photos. So here is a photo of the wake that I believed proof of planing under sail.
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/boardup.jpg
So let it rip. I have been here before - thats 3 knots you idiot - etc etc. Only it was 9.5 to 12 MPH sustained for over 20 minutes off Shilshole. We were passing two masted schooners of 50 foot with all cloth flying. The wake is powerboat like - or catamaran like. Heel over 11 degrees. True wind from behind. I have also tried
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/FLM195.JPG
and this photo which I thought very convicing
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/FLM202.JPG
but, these photos, which I believed proof, mean nothing to those who define planing. So I stopped arguing it. It is true that the mac26x does double digits, even 17 MPH and that the manufacturer claims the X to be its planing sailboat model and the M to be a surfing model. The keel boat trained have little chance of reaching those speeds but the dinghy trained and those new to the sport can get there easy by putting an intermediate point reef into the main, and sailing on a high normal wind day - say 12 to 17mph with full water ballast. Fire away. We are all vulnerable in our rears. Mine is now exposed. Note the bracket on the last photo that holds the lifting rudder foil.

pkoken

02-10-2005, 11:58 AM

Frank, I don't think you have ever been aboard a planing sailboat- Those pictures are from a 2-4 knot displacement cruise, nothing more.

frankofile

02-10-2005, 12:03 PM

OK, Mistral. I have not had much luck with my photos. So here is a photo of the wake that I believed proof of planing under sail.
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/boardup.jpg
So let it rip. I have been here before - thats 3 knots you idiot - etc etc. Only it was 9.5 to 12 MPH sustained for over 20 minutes off Shilshole. We were passing two masted schooners of 50 foot with all cloth flying. The wake is powerboat like - or catamaran like. Heel over 11 degrees. True wind from behind. I have also tried
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/FLM195.JPG
and this photo which I thought very convicing
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/FLM202.JPG
but, these photos, which I believed proof, mean nothing to those who define planing. So I stopped arguing it. It is true that the mac26x does double digits, even 17 MPH and that the manufacturer claims the X to be its planing sailboat model and the M to be a surfing model. The keel boat trained have little chance of reaching those speeds but the dinghy trained and those new to the sport can get there easy by putting an intermediate point reef into the main, and sailing on a high normal wind day - say 12 to 17mph with full water ballast. Fire away. We are all vulnerable in our rears. Mine is now exposed. Note the bracket on the last photo that holds the lifting rudder foil.
Ha ha ha! I knew we'd get here eventually. Frankie actually believes those pictures are of a planing wake. He has absolutely no idea what planing is, even after seeing the great pictures pkoken posted yesterday.

"Subtle transition" [Sorry, actual quote is "The planing mode is entered in a less dramatic way and your crew may not notice ..."]... as in "never happened" you dolt.

mighetto

02-10-2005, 12:20 PM

The early model rudder brackets were substantially reinforced by 1999 because these rudders are lifting foils and do that job. You can see the stainless steel brackets on the photo of the Wind. Well kind of. One day I will find a pre 1997 Mac26x with the first generation brackets. They were reinforced likely owing to the mechanics of planing under sail. The rudders are not deployed when motoring at speed. Under sail, these foils do gradually change the pitch of the boat into a more nose up possition when pushing hard. You are instructed to move the crew is as far back as possible to get the bow higher. A high bow reduces the length at waterline which decreases the displacement hull speed meaning that you are into forced mode at a lower speed than would be indicated by math. By moving the crew forward, the Mac26x crests her bow wake and is plaining. Sustained planing mode is not at all difficult.

Frankie, do you really believe what you've just written????????

I am struggling with it. Of all the discussion on all the forums I have been involved with involving my ride - the planing capabilities of the vessel have been the most controversial.

Certainly the boat planes under motor power. The manufacturer wants you to protect the rudders while motoring by lifting them when the boat is motoring above 7 MPH. That is right at the thoretical max hull speed for a displacement hull of 22 feet (7.22 MPH). I estimate that when crew are sitting aft that 22 feet is about what is presented to the water. However, possibly all of us have motored with the rudders down (operator error) at high speed and haven't ripped off the rudder fins.

When I first drafted the statement Under sail, these foils do gradually change the pitch of the boat into a more nose up possition when pushing hard. I was thinking of one fin and two fin operation. On a 11 to 15 degree heel, I think I feel the boat lift under me when I drop the second rudder, which brings the nose down. You are instructed to lift a rudder when going down wind which would lift the bow then (right?). The flat portion of the hull in the rear also is contributing to lift when you get speed. Perhapse the lift isn't as great as the boat you are thinking of and most of the lift comes from hull characteristics. But the rudders are definately lifting foils.
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/FLM196.JPG
One of the definitions of planing that I picked up was that if the wind indicator points forward of midship on a downwind run then you are planing. So I took this photo when my notions were being ridiculed a few years back.

What I believe is that Roger MacGregor put his career reputation on the line with the Mac26x model. He claims the boat is revolutionary and does 17 MPH under sail. I have no reputation to loose on this. So I can at least speak and try to understand and match that performance. The moment I admitted to being a former power boater, I lost credibility with a good number of "sailors". The same thing happens with those who admit to being multi-hullers so I just do not take it seriously anymore. What do you think? Fog is lifting? OK, rip away. I will be unavalable for several days and unable to respond. So have fun.

SailDesign

02-10-2005, 12:35 PM

One of the definitions of planing that I picked up was that if the wind indicator points forward of midship on a downwind run then you are planing. So I took this photo when my notions were being ridiculed a few years back.

Thanks, Frankie - I needed a good laugh. However, you now owe me a keyboard, as this one is drowned :)

Steve

Reemul

02-10-2005, 01:44 PM

skinny boy

02-10-2005, 10:11 PM

Planing in the Mac26x is like the slot effect, generations of sailors have all experienced it and know its there whether or not you can actually see it. The fact that Murrelet nevers planes in the presence of another boat that can attest to it merely means no one understands what conditions are right for it.

Afterall by the definition provided the Mac26x only qualifies as a non-planing boat unlike ULDBs. So we know the normal planing winds only exist around the Mac26x and others never see it because it doesn't exist in the rest of the world.

frankofile

02-11-2005, 02:05 AM

The Mac26x is actually very shy. It doesn't like to show off, and so will only plane when no one except Frank is looking.

mistral

02-11-2005, 05:20 AM

But the rudders are definately lifting foils.

One of the definitions of planing that I picked up was that if the wind indicator points forward of midship on a downwind run then you are planing.

sorry Frank
rudders are not lifting foil, that's all, anyway you can put it they're not lifting foil
T-foils like used in Moth may work as a lifting foil, properly designed and calculated, nor the rudder nor the horizontal fins of your engine

planing means that your CG raises up 'cause of dynamic lift, that's all
nothing to do with apparent wind angle as you're claiming, i don't know who suggested you such a rubbish notion, but you'd better look for better sources for your sailing culture

Mistral

mighetto

02-14-2005, 12:10 PM

Good Morning Boat Designers and Sailing Anarchists:

Let me first request a change in protocal. Rather than hailing Murrelet as "Kiss Me Arse" in Boundary Bay by radio on channel 16, try KMA or Murrelet. Still, nice gag. Hope the Coast Guard didn't mind so much. 10,000 views of this thread on Murrelet's 6 year aniversery. Happy Valentines Day!

Old Business

usa2

Canting keels dont typically fall off if they aren't in storms or get damaged by a grounding. The problem with them is that they are only really efficient offshore, where you are more likely to run into a storm than not.

With modern reporting, only thrill seakers will run into storms. The storms and hurricanes we had this season on the east coast of the USA confirmed the notion that a distance no greater than 60 miles is all that is needed to avoid storms. This means only operators of slow sailing and motoring vessels can claim competency while relating a story about weathering a storm at sea. That would not be the operator of a race boat.

Well there could be an exception, but seriously, with modern reporting you have to question operator competency in this situation. Were the crew and captain drunk with race enthusiasm?

You cant build an inshore round the buoys racer with a canting keel, because on upwind legs it wont be able to compete in tacking duels without getting killed.

Wow. Such a great statement! I was reviewing a lubber's dictionary on Sunday. This is a dictionary that defines the word Ahoy as "the first of many four letter words that will be exchanged after two sailors meet.". Every definition - even that one - had some ring of truth. A centerboard was defined as a movable keel always stuck in the down position. From the minds of lubbers came insite. Canting keels are - of course - also movable keels. So are dagger boards. In the USA, most race fleets prohibit centerboarders, and daggerboards, which are a kind of centerboard, but not yet canters from altering the configuration of the board during a race. If it is allowed the penulty in rating is overwhelming and usually the boat must race with the board fully extended.

You are generally correct that on upwind legs many fixed keelers will outperform centerboarders. But on downwind legs, when the board can be retracted, this disadvantage is compensated for because the centerboarder, when sailed as designed, will have less drag owing to the wetted surface of the board being removed by retraction. You are incorrect on the canters. The canters have forward foils or other mechanisms that allow them to sail DIRECTLY UP TRUE WIND - at least that is the claim for the Schock 40. The canters likely will win tacking duals.

New Business

USA2,

The keels on the big boats, where the concept makes the biggest difference, should be strong enough to stand up to a huge storm- especially if the boat was designed with line honours in the Sydney-Hobart in mind.

Prior to about 1900, all sailing vessels used internal (also called bilge) ballast in the form of cargo, stone and, as in the case of Spray, concrete. Spray continues to be disparaged as a cheep boat because of her ballast.Yet this method of ballasting has been proven by time. Oriole is a 1918 George Owen (of MIT) racing yacht that was intended to be the largest yacht on the Great Lakes. She is larger than the current day maxis at 102 foot over all and 91 foot at the water line. The way to honor the sailors of the past is to preserve their vessels and in 2003 Oriole underwent a major overhaul.

The most significant make over was the removal of CONCRETE ballast which was replaced with lead. Over the years Oriole gained a following among the less "yachty" and became known as the peoples boat. However it must have been distressing to the well heeled to have an internal concrete ballasted vessel better them.

Oriole came in second in the 1998 Victoria-Maui race and in 2000 finished more than 19 hours ahead on corrected time over some of the most modern raceboats on the Pacific. In 1998 she finished seventh in the Sydney-Hobart. This was the infamous race where 55 people had to be rescued, 5 boats sank, and 66 boats retired out of the 115 that started, 6 sailor's lives were lost during that race. To say the Oriole's design is proven, understates the contributions she has made to the science of sailing. The 102 ft ketch is currently owned by the Canadian Navy and is used for training of Regular and Reserve Canadian Navy members. It is distressing to those who would like to think of Oriole as the people's boat to have the concrete removed and replaced with an expensive substitute that has not been shown any more effective. But that lead is still internal.

The notions of long weighted fins just have not been shown correct by the test of time is the point. Designers need to get beyond that. Shorter weighted fins and long retractable possibly unweighted fins are the future of sailing yacht design. Oriole and Spray show us that this is a return to the sensibilities of the 1900s.

SeaDrive

02-14-2005, 12:21 PM

In the USA, most race fleets prohibit centerboarders, and daggerboards, which are a kind of centerboard, but not yet canters from altering the configuration of the board during a race.

From where did you get this piece of misinformation?

Different subject: my understanding is that the big canters use engine-driven hydraulics for canting, and can reposition the keel as quickly as the genoa can be retrimmied. Still, I should think that a canter would be more of a hazard in a close quarters situation.

mighetto

02-14-2005, 12:52 PM

In the USA, most race fleets prohibit centerboarders, and daggerboards, which are a kind of centerboard, but not yet canters from altering the configuration of the board during a race.

SeaDive,

From where did you get this piece of misinformation?

Boy I hope it is untrue! I am thinking keel boat racing. In the context of keel boat buoy racing, this is likely correct. Your snip would better reflect my meaning if reworded. "In the USA, most keel boat race fleets prohibit centerboarders, and daggerboards, which are a kind of centerboard, but not yet canters from altering the configuration of the board during a race."

Different subject: my understanding is that the big canters use engine-driven hydraulics for canting, and can reposition the keel as quickly as the genoa can be retrimmied.

Engine-driven is the argument that will be used to keep canters out of some race fleets. PHRF-NW however is allowing water ballast to be pumped by motor driven means so this is analygous. I do not see the motor-driven argument as deminishing racablity of the canters except at clubs dominated by Samurai sailors. These old warriors know their ways of sailing are useless in competing with modern race boat fleets on fast Olympic style courses. They will continue to argue the benefits of two fixed daggers, a long keel and a shorter rudder and they will continue to be treated as wards of the sailing clubs they belong to, just as the Samurai became wards of Japan in the age of the Black Ships when it was obvious to all exept their kind that they could no longer provide value, outside of a show, to their societies. We call the show, windward-leeward races.
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/lskhan.gif
At a certain point it is time to move on. We have come to that point in the USA by virtue of the worse showing in the Olympics in 60 years in the sailing sport and the inability to even challenge for the Americas Cup during the last 7 years.

Still, I should think that a canter would be more of a hazard in a close quarters situation.

You think having 10 or more crew through their bodies from one side to the other on a race boat safer? You see lubbers sit on juries. Those lubbers view the boom as a mechanism used to knock crew from one side of the boat to the other or overboard. It takes special training to see otherwize. The training currently given the keel boat sailor. Modern designs have to reduce the number of crew needed to operate them. This is a major benefit of movable ballast. Do not get me wrong. I am not a canting keel fan yet. I just see arguments against the canters to be similar to arguments against all forms of movable ballast and have expanded the definition of movable ballast to include swing keels (another name for centerboard) and daggers.

Reemul

02-14-2005, 01:02 PM

What race fleets are you talking about Frank? The S2 7.9 raced at Key West and in most of the NOOD regattas. And in those races tey were allowed to pull the daggerboard.

Also, you havn't answered my question on my previous post.

mighetto

02-14-2005, 01:53 PM

Frank, That top picture sure looks like the South Sound (Dana Passage area) not Shilshoal area. Now the attached picture (by Sean Trew) was taken of my boat (S2 7.9) going downwind in 10-15kts of wind. We were sailing at 7kts overground against a .5 kt current in Dana Passage and were NOT planing. How do you feel this compares to your photo?
Good morning Reemul. So you disagree that most keel boat race fleets
prohibit foil retraction? I think you looked into this for Sugar a year or so ago
and discovered that the additional seconds tacked onto your rating to do so
in a PHRF-NW race might undo any potential benefit. This is a rating issue
that may need to be protested. The sport advances by protests. If I were
allowed back on your boat to crew, I might encourage foil retraction to reach
planing speed on downwind runs, because every time I run numbers on the
S2 7.9 I am convinced she should do so. The centerfoil in your photo I
assume was fully extended. Might retraction have allowed her to break from
the sea? How about moving all the crew aft as we are instructed on the X
boats to do? This might reduce the length at waterline enough to crest the
bow wave at a slower speed and break from the sea.

If you have the time, try modifying Sugar's buttocks on your Catia program
so it doesn't lift but instead keeps flat like on Murrelet.
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/sugar2.JPG
The above photo shows a rising arse on Sugar. This I understand makes
sense at displacement speeds because the turbulance from the wave form
created by moving forward does not suck her backwards. Instead it falls
harmlessly under the arse. (on Murrelet we sail 4th mode to do this.)
But the lifted buttocks on Sugar discourages her from planing.

On the Category A vessel I was crewing on Saturday we had constant 18 to
22 knot winds with the windwaves at 3 to 4 feet. We kept the wind but lost
the waves after getting into deep water and even at 4.5 knots of boat speed
there was nothing like the stern wake of Murrelet's photo, or of yours. The
next day in calms under motor power, I noticed the start of something like
the wave form off the stern of the Murrelet photos but nothing so dramatic.

Thank you for keeping the buttocks discussion going. I also think your rudder
is a lifting foil because it is so long and well braced.
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/sugar1.JPG
So when you take the race chair position are you planning any changes in
racing rules regarding foil retraction? If so Huzzah Huzzah. I kiss your feet!

mighetto

02-14-2005, 02:24 PM

sorry Frank
rudders are not lifting foil, that's all, anyway you can put it they're not lifting foil T-foils like used in Moth may work as a lifting foil, properly designed and calculated, nor the rudder nor the horizontal fins of your engine

planing means that your CG raises up 'cause of dynamic lift, that's all
nothing to do with apparent wind angle as you're claiming, i don't know who suggested you such a rubbish notion, but you'd better look for better sources for your sailing culture. Mistral

We look to France for our sailing culture. But not the wine. You are better off with US Sailing's brand. :) Any way the French not only gave us the statue of Liberty, and the swill they would not drink in their own country, but also multihullism. They actually spent tax dollars developing multihulls. Now on a multihull the foils probably do not lift. But on a monohull at a heel there will be lift unless the rudders are hung so they cant outward to compensate for the heel.

The question is how much lift. On sailing surf boards and on the Mac26x, you want the foils that are under the most weight on the boat to provide the most lift. That probably requires more substatial rudder hardware on a boat that is meant to plane where the operator is expected to stand or sit nearby.

Reemul

02-14-2005, 04:00 PM

Frank,
I decided not to take the 3 sec a mile penalty because I did not see a benefit in the club races that I do. I am already the scratch boat and do not see how this would help.
You however did not answer my point on what regattas do not allow a daggerboard boat.
As for your comments about changing the hull shape, I will not dignifiy that remark with an answer.
My point is that if my boat is not going to plan in the conditions we were in, then your boat does not have a chance in hell of doing it. The only time my boat has done 15kts planning was in 30-35kts of wind downwind. Also, so far when you have sailed in the same race as me, I have effectively horizoned you. Where is this speed you keep talking about?

Reemul

02-14-2005, 04:40 PM

mistral

02-14-2005, 04:53 PM

The question is how much lift.

really poor question. I perfectly know how to calculate it, a vertical component of lift when the boat is heeled, it's a calculations that even a smart high school boy can do in five minutes. Do you know how to do it Frankie???? I guess no.
That's the reason i keep on telling you RUDDERS ARE NOT LIFTING FOILS!!!
Take a good book of aerodynamic basics and stop with your absurd statements.
Currently i think you don't get the difference between a wing section and a cow.

Mistral

skinny boy

02-14-2005, 05:00 PM

mistral

02-14-2005, 05:07 PM

A wing section moos. Of course he does. Everyone knows cows fly and mac26x plane because both have lifting foils! A cow has six of them shorter than the four propulsion units but much more efficient at generating lift.
mmmmm, i thought they were efficient on generatink MILK; anyway, ok, i'm going to catch a cow and test her in the towing tank, let's see if she produces more milk, pardon LIFT, than a MAC26
:) :) :)

Mistral

mighetto

02-14-2005, 05:29 PM

Frank,
I am also posting this publicly. Do not post any more pictures of my boat without asking me first. You do not have the right. I own the boat and I decide if I want to have a picture published . Not you. Even more so when it is out of the water. I am only going to post this once.
You have never objected before? They are my photos. I stole the shots fair and square. :) You will just have to chat with the boat yard. I tell you what, get the SSSS BB back on line. It has been hacked badly by Crank Boy and Tripp Gal after I suggested they may have been behind problems you had collecting donations at the bar during the last SSSS general meeting. I tell you these folks are not your friends.

Well, perhaps all is well from your view. I was fortunate in printing out a screen shot with their handles on line during the time of the hacking. A fellow named pond sailor was also online. Probably an innocent. Isn't this boatdesign forum fine? We have had none of that hacking here and even some anarchy free discussions. Huzzah Huzzah. BTW, I have been notified that I have until Friday to protest Trip Gal and Crank Boy's behaviour under rules for unsportsman like conduct on the Internet. I suppose I will just hand deliver that, unless the SSSS BB is restored by end of business day. In that case, good gag but a real need for security on the SSSS BB.

mighetto

02-14-2005, 05:31 PM

mmmmm, i thought they were efficient on generatink MILK; anyway, ok, i'm going to catch a cow and test her in the towing tank, let's see if she produces more milk, pardon LIFT, than a MAC26
:) :) :)

Mistral

You have seen that lubbers dictionary haven't you. They had a definition of Surf and Turf - something like slime & cow.... anyway :) :rolleyes: :cool:

skinny boy

02-14-2005, 07:34 PM

I tell you what, get the SSSS BB back on line. It has been hacked badly by Crank Boy and Tripp Gal after I suggested they may have been behind problems you had collecting donations at the bar during the last SSSS general meeting. I tell you these folks are not your friends.

Well, perhaps all is well from your view. I was fortunate in printing out a screen shot with their handles on line during the time of the hacking. A fellow named pond sailor was also online. Probably an innocent. Isn't this boatdesign forum fine? We have had none of that hacking here and even some anarchy free discussions. Huzzah Huzzah. BTW, I have been notified that I have until Friday to protest Trip Gal and Crank Boy's behaviour under rules for unsportsman like conduct on the Internet. I suppose I will just hand deliver that, unless the SSSS BB is restored by end of business day. In that case, good gag but a real need for security on the SSSS BB.

Accusing people of committing a crime is pretty bold. I trust you have proof to back up your claims. If I were them I would get a lawyer and I would sue you and SSSS. Apparently that is the only way you will learn anything from your behaviour.

By the way, there are no "rules for unsportman like conduct on the Internet". I think you should definitely protest. I would like to go to that hearing. Please post the date and time. I will fly in for such an entertaining time. Making false allegations is liable under the law and those people will have the last laugh if they chose to excercise their rights.

So I did a search for the SSSS board and see that it is only for a single race and nothing else. Apparently it has not been restored and is after the business day so when is the protest hearing time. Under what rules is the protest being done? Who is the convening authority and what rule is being alledged broken?

This should rise to the ranks of admiralty law in a hurry I am sure the Supreme Court will want to rule on this.

It is not a sportsman rule you are accusing people of it is a federal felony offense. I would make sure you have your protest form filled out correctly.

FranksaDork

02-14-2005, 08:17 PM

It has been hacked badly by Crank Boy and Tripp Gal after I suggested they may have been behind problems you had collecting donations at the bar during the last SSSS general meeting. I tell you these folks are not your friends.

Well, you're wrong about that Frank. My advice to you would be to shut your cake hole on that subject.

unless the SSSS BB is restored by end of business day

It won't be. Thanks to you for the most part. Did you read the moderators message to you before it was shut down? Didn't think so.

frankofile

02-14-2005, 09:09 PM

Hey, this sounds good! How did Frankie manage to pollute the SSSS BB???

FranksaDork

02-14-2005, 09:36 PM

Hey, this sounds good! How did Frankie manage to pollute the SSSS BB???

Just by being himself. Drove the poor moderator (who is a good friend of mine) nuts trying to keep up with his BS. Wasn't worth the effort and I don't blame him for shutting it down. I would have.

pkoken

02-14-2005, 09:39 PM

How did you do it Frank?

Did you pollute yet another electronic medium with you incessant meaningless, baseless gibberish until finally the owners of said medium could take it no longer?

pkoken

02-14-2005, 09:49 PM

Reemul

02-15-2005, 07:10 AM

SeaDrive

02-15-2005, 07:47 AM

On the subject of moveable foils, I think you have confused on thing with another. I think there is a general prohibition against foils that rotate to get a better angle of attack, and limitations on trim tabs. And, there has traditionally been a prohibition against moving ballast (aside from crew) that is left over from the days of sandbaggers. However, centerboards and daggerboards that are not heavy enough to have much ballast effect can be moved.

The "prohibition" against moving heavy foils is really for boats like the Tripp 26 that are keel boats designed so the keel can be lifted for trailering. Boats like this may have inadequate stability with the keel up, so the keel must be kept in the down position while racing. It's really enforced via rating: the rating is given for the boat with the keel in the down position. I think there are some grey areas. There was a discussion on SA about racing the S2 7.9 downwind with the keel raised. I would have thought that was prohibited, but I have no special knowledge of the class, or of the details on a PHRF rating certificate.

With respect to the large crews used on some of the big boats, there is a tension between technology and sociology. Remember that the owners of these boats tend to be captains of industry who are good at collecting and organizing teams; it's what they do at work, and it's what they do at play. For them, it is a way of using their particular skills and the power of their large purses to set themselves above the common throng. A lot of races now have crew weight limits, and most boats would sneak another man along if they could. Still, an Open 60 with one man aboard can outsail a lot of heavily manned boats of similar length.

Reemul

02-15-2005, 07:57 AM

The S2 7.9 has been designed to pull the board downwind and it is done in one design racing (Class regattas, NOODs, etc.). I have been told this is because it can have the possiblity of "tripping over the daggerboard". It is self righting with the board up due to the fact it carries 1150 lbs of ballast along with the 600lb daggerboard. I have not tried sailing with the board up but have talked to 7.9 sailors who have and they say the boat is very stable when sailed that way. I intend to try it this summer on a non-race day.

mighetto

02-15-2005, 10:52 AM

Just by being himself. Drove the poor moderator (who is a good friend of mine) nuts trying to keep up with his BS. Wasn't worth the effort and I don't blame him for shutting it down. I would have.

Hey, the moderator is a fellow named Rich. He was not allowed to do his job and the person who gifted the BB to SSSS took it on himself to moderate. He shouldn't have been involved. I spent one and a half hours discussing the situation with him on the phone last night, because he has read very little of my posts or my web site, and I also consider him a friend for teaching my wife about sailing and taking the photos of Murrelet that I am so proud of.

While not part of the conversation, it is my opinion that he took a lot of heat from the fellow who started the failing Sailing Anarchy Forum for gifting the board to SSSS. So much heat that he now regrets the donation. Sailing Anarchy really is about supporting TP52s and disparaging R Coutts. Oh, go to the TP52 site and click on the many links that claim to support a TP52. These boats do not exist. It is so pathetic.

However, I am the only one that is suppose to think that the SSSS board is shut down. If that is not the case and others can not view the threads there, I would like to know. I can live with out access until it is dealt with through a protest that is now being drafted. Please email me at mighetto@eskimo.com if you see what I see: IE

You have been banned from this forum.
Please contact the webmaster or board administrator for more information.

when accessing http://www.pacificfog.net/phpbb/index.php,
Thanks.

It is one thing to denigh access to some one who through thier membership dues paid for that access it is another thing to denigh access to over 500 sailors who have paid for that access and to the sailors that they hope to interact with who have not yet extended financial support.

frankofile

02-15-2005, 11:03 AM

pkoken

02-15-2005, 11:14 AM

Frank, do you ever stop think why it is that so many people have issue with your personal points of view? Do you honestly believe it is because you are a genius and that you (and your good friend Roger MacGregor) see things that nobody else can?

http://www.ahajokes.com/cartoon/6thsense.jpg

You have come to a forum dedicated to yacht design, and once here you begin to offer your unsolicited advice to experts on this subject... maybe this has something to do with it... maybe...

mighetto

02-15-2005, 11:47 AM

Philip, you are going to be very pleased with what I am doing for this sport. You need not believe me. Just watch. I know what I am doing. If I end up building Mac26x copies, or some one else does, it will not mater to me. This is my first year as a sailboat racer and I already have accomplished more than many with 10 or more years racing. PS - there are fewer dump people on the West Coast of the US. :)

SailDesign

02-15-2005, 11:49 AM

PS - there are fewer dump people on the West Coast of the US.

We (the East Coast) rest our case.......

Dump that, migho. :)

mighetto

02-15-2005, 11:57 AM

So they actually banned you from your own club's bulletin board. That's awesome! One day that will happen here. As for your completely unsubstantiated, inaccurate, and idiotic rant against SA, all I can think to say is: GOD YOU'RE A DICK FRANKIE.
No that is incorrect. The doner of the board has just had enough. Not from me. I am not the one causing him trouble. But others have hounded him by telephone. He is looking for a board member to step up and tell him he is out of the loop. A Board Member other than me. These situations are always difficult when they involve an endowment from a wealthy individual. This will be resolved by normal procedures set forth by the rules of racing. If you would like to dicuss my protest strategy then just say so. I think it is a good one. Even if Tripp Gal et al are not banned from racing the rest of the season, the behavior will be on file for the next fellow that is wronged by them. If I were the only one, I would say - perhaps it is me. But I am not.

mighetto

02-15-2005, 12:01 PM

We (the East Coast) rest our case.......

Dump that, migho. :)

Love the smilie. Thanks. I am changing my Sailing Anarchy tude on that. It is things like the following that compel me to do so:

Seadrive

On the subject of moveable foils, I think you have confused on thing with another. I think there is a general prohibition against foils that rotate to get a better angle of attack, and limitations on trim tabs. And, there has traditionally been a prohibition against moving ballast (aside from crew) that is left over from the days of sandbaggers.

Excellent leed in as this was the topic I had hoped to get to this week. The story of the sandbaggers. Did you think of it owing to how I was sandbagged during a valentines day massacre.

Sand-baggers were small half-decked boats used for commercial purposes and as party boats by New York sportsmen willing to bet on the races. Wide shallow centerboard craft with huge sails and great beam with two mast steps, one for a sloop rig and one for a cat rig, characterized these movable ballasted racing machines. The movable ballast was in the form of bagged sand and when conditions required the ballast the racers would agree before hand if the ballast was to be "brought home" or thrown overboard during the race. They were 18 to 28 feet in length and popular as early as 1855. These were extraordinarily fast boats in smooth water, perhaps like Melges or Mac26x boats today. However, so that the ballast could be carried out far from centerline the topsides were flared. This meant that the gunwales could be easily burred in the sea with capsizing being the result

Because of their speed, boat designers copied them in bigger models that were not crewed by racing professionals and hence became dangerous. It is because of this that the centerboard yacht gained a bad reputation that should have been credited to poor design rather than to inherent qualities of the type.

However, centerboards and daggerboards that are not heavy enough to have much ballast effect can be moved.

I have been told, but this would be a mater of protest, that if weed is caught on the centerboard it can be moved to clear the weed. But that is about it in PHRF-NW races and it is stretching things. The centerboard or daggerboard MUST have at least enough weight in it that it sinks. Otherwise it is not considered a keel boat and only keel boats are allowed to race PHRF-NW.

The "prohibition" against moving heavy foils is really for boats like the Tripp 26 that are keel boats designed so the keel can be lifted for tailoring. Boats like this may have inadequate stability with the keel up, so the keel must be kept in the down position while racing.

Dude! do you know how long I have been trying to get to this part of the centerboard myth? Hard as I tried, Trip Gal would not go there. Here is the point to be made. There are many keel boaters that believe that all centerboards are good for is for trailering. Just the other day I was told that the only reason MacGregor Yachts has centerboards on its ocean sailboats is for trailering. This totally ignores the owners instructions for the boat and it has caused harm because some owners have been convinced that they need rigging changes to control weather and lee helm. Swing style centerboard positioning controls that. It is a steering control in other words.

It's really enforced via rating: the rating is given for the boat with the keel in the down position. I think there are some grey areas. There was a discussion on SA about racing the S2 7.9 downwind with the keel raised. I would have thought that was prohibited, but I have no special knowledge of the class, or of the details on a PHRF rating certificate.

You can have the boat rated for lifting foils. Mine is so rated for the rudders. The problem is that the same adjustment is made for a lifting foil on my boat (in terms of seconds) as for an S2 7.9. That means you need to protest the adjustment and to have an effective protest you probably need a loosing race season. Who has time for that? What I will be trying to do, assuming my sailing career continues at the wild pace it has recently, is to reduce the penalty by more than half. This just to get more boats to try racing the boat as the manufacturer intended. It also puts the burden of protest on the boats with fixed keels. On these better data has been collected. The final result would probably be class adjustments in ratings for boats with movable ballast. (retractable foils are a form of movable ballast)

With respect to the large crews used on some of the big boats, there is a tension between technology and sociology. Remember that the owners of these boats tend to be captains of industry who are good at collecting and organizing teams; it's what they do at work,

The large crews IMO are also the result of the sandbaggers. When these vessels were upsized for the casual racer, the notion of movable ballast being dangerous was born. Prohibiting this sand bag form of movable ballast required those who wanted to be competitive to replace it with rail meat. Regarding collecting and organizing teams, if that were true then the owners would be good at organizing race events and race clubs as well. Sorry, these fellows need not be good at collecting and organizing teams. You can hire R Coutts, for that. Then once that job is done, you can prepare to fire him and cheat him out of moving to a different AC boat. This is not the conduct of a sportsman and is the reason for Coutts working his protest.

and it's what they do at play. For them, it is a way of using their particular skills and the power of their large purses to set themselves above the common throng.

Common throng? Well in other countries perhaps. In the USA the only folks watching the sailboat races are those who know someone who races. None of those folks are common. Compare with auto racing, or any of a number of sports. No something else is going on, at least in the USA.

A lot of races now have crew weight limits, and most boats would sneak another man along if they could. Still, an Open 60 with one man aboard can out sail a lot of heavily manned boats of similar length.

Nice wrap up.

pkoken

02-15-2005, 12:34 PM

Philip, you are going to be very pleased with what I am doing for this sport. You need not believe me. Just watch.

Do I have to? It hurts my eyes!

frankofile

02-15-2005, 02:10 PM

Tell me everyone, Am I crazy for not wanting Frank to post pictures of my boat? I fully believe that Frank has the right to free speech. However, I have my own ideas about sailing. Once in a great while I can find something that he says that I agree with. Most of the time I don't agree. And I don't want to it to be thought that by the use of pictures of my boat, that I support his views.
Frank, Why couldn't you have just said, "I'm sorry I didn't know it bothered you and wont do it again" Instead, You gave a F**k you answer and made wild accusations that have no basis in fact. I may have supported you at times before, but never again.

Scott Awalt
Sugar Magnolia
S2 7.9 #253I'd say you're completely justified. Putting myself in your shoes, what a queasy feeling you must get knowing that Frankie is associating himself with your boat. Yech! The guy is scum on the internet and appears to be scum in person.

Frankie, as for whether or not you are banned from your club's bb, if you see a notice there telling you that you're banned (one that I don't see when I log in, incidentally) then guess what... YOU ARE BANNED.

Wynand N

02-15-2005, 02:17 PM

Best use for a mac26x :?:

http://www.sailinganarchy.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=14816&st=0

mighetto

02-15-2005, 03:38 PM

Thank you FrankoFile, There should not be collateral damage.

Here is the draft of the protest I will be filing. You all have about 2 hours to comment. I think Internet history is being made here. I removed the names of the sailors involving the misconduct because that seemed the proper thing to do. Any help with this is appreciated.

15 February 2005

Dear Protest Committee,

I wish to report a gross breach of good manners and sportsmanship that has brought the sport into disrepute. The allegations of gross misconduct fall under the Racing Rules of Sailing (RRS) 2001-4.

This report involves encouragement of and actual theft of property by the crew and captain of _____. Encouragement of the theft has been orchestrated for several months on multiple Internet sites, causing considerable loss of reputation for the sport, with the actual thievery taking place on February 14th in what might be called a Valentines Day Massacre.

The property taken is access to my club's bulletin board. I had been warned by the crew of ____, some of whom are members of my club that such action would take place if I continued to express my views publicly regarding fixed fin and movable ballasted vessels, specifically TP52s and MacGregor 26x vessels, but also centerboard vessels and those with canting keels. These views are well documented over a period of several years and reviewed critically and are expressed primarily on a web site I and others from Sailnet.net developed (see http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/murrelet.htm)first several years ago and then enhanced regularly owing to critical and sometimes painful review such as that started at Sailing Anarchy by ______. Those offended by my views were able to persuade others, including _____ , donator of my clubs BB, that they had a right not to be offended.

No such right has ever been established in any form of communication in the US. However, I was contacted by ______ by phone who believed otherwise and had been informed by email of my posts, though he would not identify who authored the email. ____ had been a pawn in a similar action several months earlier, likely by the same individuals whoes apparent goal is not only to restrict my ability to speak about sailing but also remove me from my post as Secretary of SSSS. The net result is that a resource I value highly is no longer available, and a working relationship that I value with ____ harmed. ____ challenged me to make this protest.

The BB resource includes threads on the Toliva Shoal race and hence should result in the protest committee calling a hearing. There is continued effort to ban me from posting views regarding fixed fin and movable ballast vessels on other boards such as boatdesign.net and Sailing Anarchy and in soliciting critical review of the web site listed above. That effort will likely continue unless the protest committee can take action at this time.

If I were the only competitor so treated it would be one thing. Unfortunately ____ has threatened others, targeting those she views as my supporters, with similar treatment to the point that one individual believed himself in physical danger, while I was on vacation. She also threatened to orchestrate a boycott of Toliva Shoal which she believes I have involvement with. I have been threatened with dog doo over my vessel and challenged to a race for pink slips. This publically on Internet forums. The behavior just doesn't appear to be stoppable outside of a formal protest and it likely discourages those considering sailboat racing. I have chatted either by phone or email, and publically on Internet Formus with the completitors over a period of several months to try to resolve the issue. Competitors that would need notification in writing of the alleged misconduct include:

1.
2.
3.
4.

What do you think? I doubt the full penulty of exclusion from the race series would be imposed. Is there much or any harm that I would do with such a protest. I am hoping to advance the sport of sailing and not dog it down.

What Say You?

frankofile

02-15-2005, 04:07 PM

It's perfect the way it is, very expressive. File it the way it is and don't change a word.

mistral

02-15-2005, 04:20 PM

mighetto

02-15-2005, 04:52 PM

Well I was encouraged to add some dates and times and email adresses. But basically it is as posted. This race is allowing protests by email so I am doing that now. A hard copy is going with the race registration paper work. Then it is a done deal - no more chatting about it until the committee decides if a hearing will be held. You do not really own your boat until you have made your first modification and I suppose you are not a racer until you have filed a protest. One good aspect - Murrelet is racing Toliva Shoal one full year earlier than planned. Well we will see. It kind of depends on how threatened we feel with "accidental" collisions. :) Hope to get a feel for that on Friday at the party.

pkoken

02-15-2005, 04:57 PM

File it Frank, They are all out to get you...

Make sure to post the details of the proceedings as well~

mighetto

02-15-2005, 05:00 PM

wow, the entire world is conspiring against Frankie!!! good for a Tom Clancy's novel, "The Hunting for the RED MURRELET" with the Captain Frankie Ramius Mighettus, in his new superscret sailboat, a MAC26, escaping from a bunch of TP52 trying to sink his state-of-the-art-boat to keep the world in the dark age of bulb&keel....definitively an intrguing novel, when will it be on bookshop's desk ?????
Mistral

You can not believe those whoes toes I have stepped on with the TP52 thread. Red is an unlucky color for a sailboat. They paint Melges red. :)

You still are not getting it; Mac26x boats have positive flotation. They are unsinkable and dealers advertise them that way. The fact that a dealer is currently trying to drum up business for a bulb keel idea on the old Mac26d models at Sailnet.net should clue you into why MacGregor Yachts specifically points out in its owners manuals that dealers do not represent the yacht company.

Murrelet
1999 Mac26x
Olympia WA
Sail number 79020
casting off.

Crueller

02-15-2005, 05:26 PM

Francis -

Please advise which competitors in which event you are protesting? Oh and also let us know who you will be calling as witnesses in the event your protest is heard (bwaaaaaaaaahhhaaaa haaaa). Oh and in the event your protest is heard please make sure to photograph the diagram of the 'incident' that you present.

pkoken

02-15-2005, 06:54 PM

A Preview Of Frank Mighetto's Hearing

"You see, all of these mean people on the internet said I was stupid and called me bad names..."

http://www.iguk.org/files/images/2130-retard.jpg

"Then they made fun of my boat, and banned me from my own club's discussion forum. I would like to say for the record that all of these activities have been taken by parties who fear my race course dominance. I would like to show Exhibit A, which clearly illustrates the superior speed of my fine ocean voyaging vessel."

http://www.koken.org/sail/26xplane.jpg

"Finally, in fear of being exposed for the poor sailors that they are, they have chosen to defame me upon the internet and to willfully make efforts to interfere with my rights:
Right to be annoying
Right to pass my opinion as FACT
Right to claim any and all performance capabilities for my fine ocean voyaging yacht
Right to conduct my religious beliefs (worship of Roger MacGregor) without persecution
By denying my rights these people are causing significant harm to me, and to my outstanding professional reputation."

"I would like to offer as proof, a photograph of the fine ship "Murrelet' sailing in the "Seventeenth Mode" and clearly utilizing her sophisticated water ballast. Note, that you can clearly see from the wake, and the lack of a bow wave that in fact, she is PLANING in this photograph."

http://www.clyc.com/photos/misc/sunkensandy.jpg

FranksaDork

02-15-2005, 07:08 PM

It is one thing to denigh access to some one who through thier membership dues paid for that access

Frank, you're cracking me up. Your dues have nothing to do with the forum. You have no rights to use it as a member of SSSS. it is not owned by SSSS.

Keep them out of it ok?

And it doesn't matter whom holds the title of moderator. If the OWNER of the board wants you out, guess what, you're out.

FranksaDork

02-15-2005, 07:10 PM

A Preview Of Frank Mighetto's Hearing

"You see, all of these mean people on the internet said I was stupid and called me bad names..."

"Then they made fun of my boat, and banned me from my own club's discussion forum. I would like to say for the record that all of these activities have been taken by parties who fear my race course dominance. I would like to show Exhibit A, which clearly illustrates the superior speed of my fine ocean voyaging vessel."

"Finally, in fear of being exposed for the poor sailors that they are, they have chosen to defame me upon the internet and to willfully make efforts to interfere with my rights:
Right to be annoying
Right to pass my opinion as FACT
Right to claim any and all performance capabilities for my find ocean voyaging yacht
Right to conduct my religious beliefs (worship of Roger MacGregor) without persecution
By denying my rights these people are causing significant harm to me, and to my outstanding professional reputation."

"I would like to offer as proof, a photograph of the fine ship "Murrelet' sailing in the "Seventeenth Mode" and clearly utilizing her sophisticated water ballast. Note, that you can clearly see from the wake, and the lack of a bow wave that in fact, she is PLANING in this photograph."

You crack me up to Phillip. Good stuff. Goood stuff I say. :)

mighetto

02-16-2005, 11:47 AM

Good Morning Boat Designers, Sailing Anarchists and The Society

Old Business

The SSSS BB has suffered what has all the signs of a hack. It was reported to me last night that after filing "the protest" that the BB was first closed to all, then reported to be open only to The Society, then confirmed still closed to all; then the Toliva Thread Only was reported open to all but then it was confirmed to still be closed. And, I was credited with threatening law suits to the donator of the BB, something I would never even consider let alone do. What a story! All of that Serious.

The following whimsical - no snipping now :) : Operatives are still collecting data, perhaps those who are interested can report back. It appears that all posters who had previously been identified as of The Society may have been targeted with comments meant to frighten them off their own BB and that an unknown organization possibly collecting names for a charity organization soliciting funds for something related to boat design which I will chat about below, was in the process of capturing the entire BB for its own noble gain. Operatives: keep it brief - this forum is about boat design! I only mention this old business by way of preserving my sanity and enhancing my low state of credibility and introducing noble boat design charity efforts. I BE THE MAN. Oh How I Love the Race Game. The best Reality Show ever!

New Business

Back to Serious: It turns out that unknowingly, and in spite of filing "the protest" correctly by email, that I was drafted to be part of the protest committee reviewing it; as was one of the folks named in the complaint. Now I never remember volunteering for this duty but after several reminders to all present that this appeared improper and after threatening to leave the proceedings and being asked most kindly to stay in spite of my aggravated monkey butt state of mind we, an SSSS BB founding member who had been scared off the BB, and a PHRF Board member who was kind enough to attend and is NOT an SSSS Board Member, resolved it. There just are not enough sailors in the world, we need more so that roles and responsibilties do not cross so wildly. Whimsical now: But the ways of The Society, while mysterious are highly effective.

Serious now: I remain convinced that the form of "the protest" and content is right on. Many ideas regarding how "the protest" could be dismissed were discussed. The one that made the most sence was that since the Toliva Shoal Race had not yet started that it was impossible to at this time "fly a flag of protest." For the most part, it was agreed that theft and encouragement of theft was unsportsman like conduct, and with the exception of the individual named in the report, all appeared to agree that for once - it wasn't about me. There was even some recognition that "the protest" involved Toliva because of the race planning value of the Thread on the stolen internet access. While the penulties can be harsh for this kind of thing they can result in just a warning and as far as I am concerned that warning has already been given. So I am withdrawing "the protest". My objective remains to enhance not dog down the sailing sport.

However, the race series had already started and a protest at that level with the same wording, IMO, would make sense. Stand Down Tripp Gal and her supporters. Take the warning shot gracefully.

Furthermore, It turns out that I have yet to file a protest. What I filed was a report. On this kind of thing it is the committee that reviews that report which actally makes the protest. The protest is by committee inother words.

This mechanism has so much potential to keep flame wars off all the sailing related sites that I am passing information on this experience to those whos judgement must be respected so it may be used in the future.

Now back to boat design. The notion that centerboards are mechanisms only for trailering has to not only be tempered with the fact that owners manuals for most of these craft will say otherwise but also with the fact that more and more sailing areas have slings to lift smaller vessels to their trailers. The more these lifts become available the more leeway designers will have with the kinds of centerboards they can market. In particular, these lifts support the canters. Blue Water Yachts, a dealer of both MacGregors and Schock 40s just this year acquired one. The charitable foundation I referred to whimsically, is trying to get such a lift for South Puget Sound. Their efforts truly are noble because they support the Future of Yacht Design. That future is movable ballast, quite likely canters as well as water ballast, and removable keels for trailering. Now whimsical: I can not claim that The Foundation was born from The Society, nor that they should be viewed that way, but I have given money to them an encourage others to do so as well.

The Church of FOYD is now open.

We welcome The Society today and thank them for complements on the research the church has done regarding boat design. Please do not be afraid to post. All are welcome here.

mighetto

02-16-2005, 12:33 PM

Frank, you're cracking me up. Your dues have nothing to do with the forum. You have no rights to use it as a member of SSSS. it is not owned by SSSS. Keep them out of it ok? And it doesn't matter whom holds the title of moderator. If the OWNER of the board wants you out, guess what, you're out.

Dork, are you feeding one to whom "the protest" was directed? I mean it is like your words out of his mouth last night.

I speak for the Board with the following sentence: It is the opinion of SSSS that the BB in discusion is and has always been - AND WILL REMAIN - the valued property of SSSS. Furthermore there has never been a vision that the BB was an "experiment" that might be shut down if needed. This resource is the reason some members have chosen to purchase memberships. Now back to simple mighetto-isms

Motions to designate the donator of the BB as moderator were not recognised by the chairman last night. (I wounder what twisted logic thinks that is important?) There was discusson that Rich, the designated moderator, did not have the ability to remove posts but Rich has always been an excellent moderator of my material and a phone call to one with that ability should be all he needs.

I watched the melt down when it was happening and while the donator has taken responsibilty for removing legitimate posts by me, I did not see his handle active during the melt down, or when the posts regarding SSSS ownership were being removed. I did see Tripp Gal and Crank Boy. I think he covered for someone who had confused him into thinking moderator was a role he had authorization to to take or confused him into thinking he was still an owner. Actually, I know he had help because he obtained my home IP address, or says he did, and that would not have been possible unless he was working with a Sailing Anarchist. I do not chose to speak for the SSSS board on the unbolded material above at this time. Plus I have promissed not to share my phone conversation with the donator with anyone. Perhaps he will find a voice here today.

We are now an "owner society" in the US. That means you make decisions like an owner, not like a Dork.

pkoken

02-16-2005, 12:34 PM

pkoken

02-16-2005, 12:37 PM

Rich has always been an excellent moderator of my material.

So I take he was quite liberal with the DELETE KEY Frank?

mighetto

02-16-2005, 12:47 PM

And to think that all of these years I naively believed that racing sailing yachts was about actually SAILING THEM...
Thank you Frank for correcting me, I now understand that the true definition of racing a sailboat is discussing said activity on the internet.

While I have trophies for the first, I am afraid I have won NOTHING for the second...
Well I am unsure of where you are coming from. Sailboat racing is not racing it is a race game and there are rules to the game and it is a board game, where the board is the race course. It is also a design game because you can design the vessel for the course and for the rules if those rules involve design. It is surprising to me how many do not know this. Do you play any other game without first reading the rules? And while playing any other game do you not call it cheeting when those rules are broken? I see nothing different about Internet behavior than dockside behavior when it comes to sailing. Both are part of the race game and I think the existing rules that are applied to dockside behavior also apply to Internet behavior. The protest if it had been filed by the committee would have clearified this. It would have been president setting and would have advanced the sport. Perhaps just the warning shot has already done this.

Damn it - I have just been drafted for yet another committee. Argh save me.

pkoken

02-16-2005, 12:52 PM

Well I am unsure of where you are coming from. Sailboat racing is not racing it is a race game and there are rules to the game and it is a board game, where the board is the race course. It is also a design game because you can design the vessel for the course and for the rules if those rules involve design. It is surprising to me how many do not know this. Do you play any other game without first reading the rules? And while playing any other game do you not call it cheeting when those rules are broken?

Damn it - I have just been drafted for yet another committee. Argh save me.

Nothing you said has anything to do with internet forums Frank, Every race I have participated in had meetings (in person) to discuss protests / rules / course changes... are you saying that your particular racing organization has decided to do away with skippers meetings and replace them with e-mail? Does everyone racing have a laptop aboard with a wireless e-mail connection? Do you get race spam??

I have seen & read some pretty stupid protests before, but if you are protesting a race committee because you were banned from a club forum for being an idiot then YOUR protest takes the cake.

Shife

02-16-2005, 01:12 PM

"Actually, I know he had help because he obtained my home IP address, or says he did, and that would not have been possible unless he was working with a Sailing Anarchist. "

Frankie, I've been watching your train wreck thread for quite some time and this is by far one of the more delusional things you've said. You're in IT correct? If so you should have some idea as to how ridiculously easy it is to get someones IP address. Frank, there is no SA conspiracy against you. Get over it.

Shife

02-16-2005, 01:16 PM

"With modern reporting, only thrill seakers will run into storms. The storms and hurricanes we had this season on the east coast of the USA confirmed the notion that a distance no greater than 60 miles is all that is needed to avoid storms. This means only operators of slow sailing and motoring vessels can claim competency while relating a story about weathering a storm at sea. That would not be the operator of a race boat."

Do you really believe this Frank? If so it only proves once again that you have no idea what sailboat racing really is.

mistral

02-16-2005, 01:20 PM

Do you really believe this Frank? If so it only proves once again that you have no idea what sailboat racing really is.

Frankie has no idea of what SAILING is.

Mistral

FranksaDork

02-16-2005, 06:51 PM

It is the opinion of SSSS that the BB in discusion is and has always been - AND WILL REMAIN - the valued property of SSSS. Furthermore there has never been a vision that the BB was an "experiment" that might be shut down if needed. This resource is the reason some members have chosen to purchase memberships.

Motions to designate the donator of the BB as moderator were not recognised by the chairman last night. (I wounder what twisted logic thinks that is important?) There was discusson that Rich, the designated moderator, did not have the ability to remove posts but Rich has always been an excellent moderator of my material and a phone call to one with that ability should be all he needs.

I watched the melt down when it was happening and while the donator has taken responsibilty for removing legitimate posts by me, I did not see his handle active during the melt down, or when the posts regarding SSSS ownership were being removed. I did see Tripp Gal and Crank Boy. I think he covered for someone who had confused him into thinking moderator was a role he had authorization to to take or confused him into thinking he was still an owner. Actually, I know he had help because he obtained my home IP address, or says he did, and that would not have been possible unless he was working with a Sailing Anarchist. I do not chose to speak for the SSSS board on the unbolded material above at this time. Plus I have promissed not to share my phone conversation with the donator with anyone. Perhaps he will find a voice here today.

We are now an "owner society" in the US. That means you make decisions like an owner, not like a Dork.

Well, I won't argue about it. I WILL say after reading the above statement that, You have absolutely no idea what is/was going on. Sail is the owner of the BB (not SSSS). He appointed Rich to assist with the moderation due to time restrictions(I won't go into the details of that. Nobody's business).

As a favor, Sail graciously donated his server space to set up an maintain a board that could be used by SSSS members and other's as a meeting place, much like this one.

Between your rambling posts and the BS that you attracted to the site, he got fed up with the BB as a whole and decided the "experiment" was (or soon will be) over. That may or may not change depending on what Sail decides but, If SSSS wants a BB, they can start one up. No problem.

As far as your imaginary "hack" by Tripp Gal and Crank Boy, that's all it is. Imaginary.

*sigh*. I'm done explaining it to you. Without adding specifics that people here don't need to know or hear I can't make it any more clear and, If you don't get it by now, you won't.

barleymalt

02-16-2005, 07:55 PM

*sigh*. I'm done explaining it to you. Without adding specifics that people here don't need to know or hear I can't make it any more clear and, If you don't get it by now, you won't.[/QUOTE]

The really sad thing is that it took 30 odd pages of Mighetroll spew to reach that conclusion. That is time you will never get back. Trying to reason with him is like trying to teach your dog to talk; a noble pursuit, but ultimately pointless.

FranksaDork

02-16-2005, 08:17 PM

Trying to reason with him is like trying to teach your dog to talk; a noble pursuit, but ultimately pointless.

But at least with the dog, you have a slight chance.

CT 249

02-16-2005, 09:53 PM

Also, if you get pissed off with your dog's inability to learn, you can't take out your frustrations on it....hurting a dumb animal like that is cruel.

In contrast, taking out your frustrations on a dumb animal like Frank is a good clean sport that should be encouraged.

Mighetto, you are a two-faced coward. You insult designers, skippers, owners and crews of TP52s and other boats; you accuse a naval architect of committing perjury as part of some bizarre plot; you implicitly assert that rating authorities, designers and builders are committing unprofessional conduct and are failing in professional standards and duties; and then you run away and complain to the race committee.

Have you ever thought that any organisation MUST ban your ravings lest they be sued for defamation by Teeters, for allowing your disgusting, cheating, low-life paranoid accusations get aired?

Frank, your activities are threatening the sites you visit and the club of which you are a member. These ravings of yours are published (in technical legal terms) in countries where your BS is clearly defamatory under law. The SSSS HAS to take action to prevent itself landing in trouble because of YOUR actions.

Mark 42

02-18-2005, 04:18 PM

I challenge anyone to read the "10 Myths" dissertations without
shaking your head and saying "no, No, NO!" out loud.
(use the tabs at the top to navigate the website)

http://www.amasci.com/~mighetto/murrelet.htm

Shife

02-18-2005, 04:49 PM

Why does this idiot have 2 different URL's for his amazing breakthrough cruising log?

http://www.amasci.com/~mighetto/murrelet.htm
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/murrelet.htm

gybeset

02-19-2005, 08:30 AM

Why does this idiot have 2 different URL's for his amazing breakthrough cruising log?

http://www.amasci.com/~mighetto/murrelet.htm
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/murrelet.htm

some kinda contingwncy, after all HWSNBM can't deny us our education cos 1 server may de down !

paranoia , forces of evil may strike his site

CT 249

02-20-2005, 10:20 AM

Frank, here's another protest for you....already cut and pasted.

15 February 2005

Dear Protest Committee,

I wish to report a gross breach of good manners and sportsmanship that has brought the sport into disrepute. The allegations of gross misconduct fall under the Racing Rules of Sailing (RRS) 2001-4.

The gross breach of good manners was committed by the writer, Frank Mighetto, in the course many year's ravings.

These views are well documented over a period of several years and reviewed critically and are expressed primarily on the internet including a web site I and others from Sailnet.net developed (see http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/murrelet.htm)first several years ago and then enhanced regularly owing to critical and sometimes painful review such as that started at Sailing Anarchy.

TIn my comments in the above, I have repeatedly made vicious accusations of lack of professional knowledge and skill and vile misconduct on the part of almost all professional yacht designers, US sailing instructors and others working in yacht racing; I have accused rating authorities of bad faith and creating unfair systems to disadvantage my boat; I have accused the creators of the TP52 of misleading and deceptive conduct; I have accused Mr Teeters of misleading a court of law; I have accused Macgregor yachts of replacing the M26X with an inferior boat and therefore breaching trades and practices law by representations regarding the design of the newer Mac 26M; I have maligned the US legal system; I have also defamed Mr Frank Bethwaite by comparing his Tasar to my Mac; and I have defamed cods and mullet by comparing their heads and tails to my Mac.

These smears on my fellow sailors must be considered a breach of good sportsmanship. These breaches - which go so far as to accuse a professional associated with my sport's governing body of committing perjury as part of a conspiracy of powerful figures within the sport - must be considered a breach of good manners.

I have repeatedly claimed that I have made these accusations as a result of my membership on the committee of SSSS, thereby committing the gross breach of linking my club to my defamatory ravings.

This publically on Internet forums. The behavior just doesn't appear to be stoppable outside of a formal protest and it likely discourages those considering sailboat racing. My effort will likely continue unless the protest committee can take action at this time.

I have repeatedly committed the gross breaches of good manners and sportsmanship listed above and I will do so again. Please therefore disqualify me under Rule 69 before I can further harm the sport of sailboat racing.

Frank Mighetto.

Anarchist

02-21-2005, 01:53 AM

:D :D Ya crack me up 249........ Well writen.

See ya on the weekend mate....... Will be crewing with Kez

Mark 42

02-22-2005, 09:19 AM

:p
Do I have to? It hurts my eyes!You may be watching...
but he's the one who's gonna go blind from doing it. :D

Why does this idiot have 2 different URL's for his amazing breakthrough cruising log?
http://www.amasci.com/~mighetto/murrelet.htm
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/murrelet.htm
One server can't handle the massive bandwidth demands caused
by all of us flocking to read the 10 myths of sailing... :o

pkoken

02-22-2005, 09:27 AM

Why does this idiot have 2 different URL's for his amazing breakthrough cruising log?

http://www.amasci.com/~mighetto/murrelet.htm
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/murrelet.htm

So when kindred IT administrators block access to Frank's page of nonsense he still has a chance of getting through...

Mark 42

02-22-2005, 09:57 AM

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=scaramouche

cyclops

02-22-2005, 10:24 AM

I can see him now. Mighetto explaining why they are losing the war. Slowly Hitler takes his pistol out, takes carefull aim, fires one bullet. Another suicide.

Crowie

02-27-2005, 04:09 AM

Now that this thread is reaching it's final gasp's, there has actually been some use for me, I was traveling up the Pacific Highway near Taree (for those in Australia) and followed briefly a trailer sailor that fitted into the "what the F.... is that" category, then it dawned on me thanks to Frank, I had a chance to examine all of the "unique" design elements before roaring passed a Macgregor 26, if it wasn't for the last 32 pages of entertainment I would have just dismissed it as the ugliest boat I'd ever seem, thanks all.

101

02-27-2005, 06:41 AM

Crowie, I tend to agree with you. Last weekend I was on Lopez Island here in the NW USA and saw a Mac 26. It was the first time I had seen one with it's sails up and not motering! Although I was not able to check out the details. It was interesting in a sort of freakish way. I kinda felt sorry for the owners that they were not able to really appreciate the wind that day.

This thread has been . . . as in those famous words from the Dead . . . "What a long strange trip it's been". I guess out of some weird interest I want to know - Where did Frank go?

Mark 42

03-02-2005, 11:30 AM

gust from 15 mph to 30 mph is the perfect opportunity to get the Mac26x on plane. They are that light even fully ballasted. I suspect Melges are the same way.Melges couldn't possibly be as fast as the M26X... it can't dump ballast.

Mark 42

03-02-2005, 04:18 PM

I guess out of some weird interest I want to know - Where did Frank go?I was planning to post a shorter version of this, and could
not possibly hope to say it as well as this:

It's kind of like a really nasty car accident.
Your logic tells you not to look...not to get involved...
that it has nothing to do with you yet...

morbid curiosity makes you want to slow down and stare...
and if you really stretched your imagination, you would pull
over, get out of the car and check out all the nasty bits.
There, you can see where he slid sideways and you can see
the skidmarks (Remember that I was invited to defend
Macgregor Yachts at SailingAnarchy)

...then the paint scrapes on the median wall (But in a
sailing world where weight is the enemy, why would one purchase
a TP52? They so clearly have two much weight in the
bulb keel)

...then a few yards away you see the shattered glass (It is
my understanding that bringing the bulb weight closer to the hull
makes the boat faster like bringing the arms of a twirling ice
skater in makes the ice skater twirl faster)

...finally, you see the car. Completely unrecognizable. The airbag
has been deployed and is covered in blood. Next to the wreckage,
under a blanket, you see the twisted and bloodied torso (She sports
two rudders and centerboards and a canting keel. These boats are
horrors to the designers on the east coast of the US who just can
not get themselves away from bulb keels or fixed foils).

But, as you stare, you see the torso begin to move slowly. Then -
oh horror of horrors - it stands! Suddenly, it is whole again
without a scar (But for now, I think I will concentrate on
winning a few races)

so, I came into this late and it's taken me a while to get caught
up to how freakishly curious this fucking fruitcake is.

But now, I'm spent. I hope, for my own sake, that I've had enough.

Oh god, when will that ambulance get here!

boby boy

03-02-2005, 05:42 PM

bunch of crap!

Stu Wiley

03-18-2005, 01:59 AM

No self respecting boater would get caught dead in one of these things up here.
No offense to the manufacturers or any owners, but these things simply try to do to many functions and therefore compromise on all of them.

woodboat

03-18-2005, 06:10 AM

No self respecting boater would get caught dead in one of these things up here
So you will take a dink to shore, maybe sail a sunfish around, go fishing in a Jon boat but won't be caught dead in a Mac26?
I would rather have a Mac26 then sitting on the dock wishing I had a boat.

Mark 42

03-22-2005, 10:40 AM

I would rather have a Mac26 then sitting on the dock wishing I had a boat.The Mac 26 is a good boat for some people.
As long as they understand what it is before they buy one,
it can bring them a lot of pleasure.
It's when they are told wild exaggerations about its capabilities
that there are going to be problems... customer satisfaction and
safety being a couple of them.

The Mac 26 tends to attract people who don't want to commit
to a dedicated sailboat. The typical M26 owner likes many
features of powerboats, but would also like to be able to
shut off the motor and sail at times.

This also tends to be a profile for inexperienced boaters,
whioch means a higher proportion of them will inadvertantly
be rude by ignorance of rules of the road and also the group
will have a higher ratio of owner/skippers who get into trouble
beyond what they know how to deal with, and will need help
of one kind or another.

It probably makes a good first boat in some respects (actually,
there are reasons it doesn't), which means it will get bashed.

That could contribute to making any boat look bad.

It would be like if people driving some certain car type tended
to be teenagers with their first car... there might be a lot of
collisions with those cars, and injuries... which might lead to
the conclusion that the car is less safe than others.
It may or may not be, but the demographic of the driver
should be considered in the analysis of accident data.

Mark 42

03-22-2005, 11:04 AM

From another message thread...

The Mac 26 is the right boat for some people.
It's good for a power boater who isn't ready to commit to
owning a sailboat yet, but likes the idea od turning off
the motor when he's not in any particular hurry...
Or someone who isn't sure if he'd prefer sailing
or powerboating. Of course, you could buy an older
sailboat and powerboat for the same amount.
They do tend to hold value pretty good though.

It's not a race boat, but with handicap, can be a start
and give some exposure to what racing is (though it
could prove discouraging).

I think MacGregor's marketing is a bit more than
"Optimistic", and may end up leading to their downfall
by ruining their reputation. Previously, they didn't make
a lot of wild claims about their inexpensive trailer sailors
(at least as I remember it). If people buy Mac 26's with
certain expectations based on dealer & mfr. claims, and
are disappointed by their purchases, it will probably
come back to haunt MacGregor.

But if a person has one, and has no delusions about
beating Cup Yachts or Global Circumnavigation with
it, he might find it a good way to dabble in the power
and sail boat worlds.

But as with anything, irrationally rabid fans of a product
can make the product look dumb. Just look how many
guys wear a suit five days a week and strap on leather chaps
and apply temporary tattos and espouse the virtues of old
technology motorcycles every weekend. They look ridiculous
when they work so hard at maintaining a scowl on their faces
and lapse into the personna every time someone is watching.

And they make their product of choice look silly to those
who look at it from other perspectives.

JustSailing

04-13-2005, 01:05 PM

No self respecting boater would get caught dead in one of these things up here.

Why not? Trying a new type of boat is always fun! Any boat I can sail I will give it a go. I have sailed from Hinckleys to a peloponese fishing boat with a local "marconi rig" but no keel (Try sailing that upwind). Enjoyed every single one and hope to try many more.

As to the Mac 26x, try one they will surprise you on reaches with very good speed. Easy to get 8-9 kts with good control. Simple but fair boat for the money.

Sailing is and elitist sport for many (my boat is bigger than yours, etc) and perhaps the MAC's low cost is what makes some say " would not be caught dead in one" and others just follow suit. Don't join that crowd, test one and make up your own mind.

sharpii2

04-14-2005, 09:35 AM

Why not? Trying a new type of boat is always fun! Any boat I can sail I will give it a go. I have sailed from Hinckleys to a peloponese fishing boat with a local "marconi rig" but no keel (Try sailing that upwind). Enjoyed every single one and hope to try many more.

As to the Mac 26x, try one they will surprise you on reaches with very good speed. Easy to get 8-9 kts with good control. Simple but fair boat for the money.

Sailing is and elitist sport for many (my boat is bigger than yours, etc) and perhaps the MAC's low cost is what makes some say " would not be caught dead in one" and others just follow suit. Don't join that crowd, test one and make up your own mind.

The most intelligent post on this subject so far.

Thank you.

Bob

mighetto

07-31-2005, 08:38 PM

Complements of Sailing Anarchy :)

JSI - NavA

08-03-2005, 07:23 PM

sailsmall

08-04-2005, 02:40 PM

Frank's typical resonse to suggestions like yours is that East Coast yacht designers are conspiring with US Sailing and PHRF-NW handicappers to prevent advanced designs such as the Mac26x from competing on an even field with such obviously flawed designs as the TP52. He seems to have clammed up suddenly, but maybe he'll come out of hiding and express it in his own, more entertaining, manner.

Mark 42

08-09-2005, 01:57 PM

East is least... West is in a conspiracy...
I guess that leaves the Great Lakes region and the desert areas.

I guess the M26 is like a landsailer and capable of up to 3X the
true windpeed somehow. Frank's gonna be jealous that I thought
of it first.

water addict

08-10-2005, 12:25 PM

petee

08-13-2005, 11:48 AM

I had a Mac26X 2000 which I bought due to the price of around $22K with 25 HP Honda 4 stroke.
I sailed it quite a lot offshore as well as ICW here in Florida.
My opinion: it is built rather light! Thin hull although it does have a liner also.
Lots of fun for week-ending, but porta potties ain't my thing!
Docking was a chore as the boat would blow off just as you were almost to the dock, so windage is a problem.
After sailing it for a year or so I was able to sell it at no loss, so their value holds up anyway.
Rigging for sailing at the dock was ok, but in 90 degrees in the parking lot
it took about 45 to 60 minutes.
My Hunter 280 1998 followed which I enjoyed much more , however had to let it go when I retired and been landlocked ever since here in north Florida!
You will see under"boat building" wooden boats, my post as I contemplate building a catamaran ,at age 71 not sure how this will work out. Pete

Mark 42

08-16-2005, 09:43 AM

...as I contemplate building a catamaran ,at age 71 not sure how this will work out. Pete
Consider a Trimaran instead.

Click the picture for more info.
http://www.ne-ts.com/ar/ar-407-1.jpg (http://www.ne-ts.com/ar/ar-407capsize2.html)

mighetto

08-20-2005, 02:09 PM

Ever thought of simply doing some research on any of these subjects? Actual, published data, say, from SNAME (Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers) might be handy for most of the claims you've made. Try looking for the "Principles of Naval Architecture" published by SNAME. It should answer all of your questions on speed, stability, motions, you name it. In the context of ships, but water is water, and in the end it still needs to float.

Or you could find something cheap at Borders and still be in better condition.

Cheers

I am quite pleased that SNAME is getting some attention. If you read through the TP52 thread you will see that it was analysis to the capsize risk ratio of SNAME that exposed the TP52 as not being worthy of Trans Pacific work. Hence I proposed that they be called TransPortable and not Transpacific. Ted Brewer has a great spread in the August Good Old Boat. On page 13 (as in 4 times 13 is 52) there is a comparison of the Bristol 29.9 to the C&C 30 the Catalina 30 and the Ericson 30 which are said to have high capsize numbers. However SNAME is clear that the ratio is to be calculated with the boat at half load for an ocean crossing. With such loading the numbers are lower. Brewer apparently is free to speak out now. He really has important things to say about design and of course the old books at Borders are what he now corrects.

On page 15 is an excellent diagram of two hulls one wide with a fixed bulb fin and one thin with the bulb retracted. He stats "Both shapes are one half of the same oval. It's obvious which one will remain upside down longer". Unfortuantely it is not obvious to those who have been trained by US Sailing acredited sailing schools. Things obvious to the untrained are points of disagreement to those trained in a closed minded society. Points like why buy a boat that sinks when flooded when technology exists that can keep them floating. This is proven technology not only in the Mac26 boats but also in the Etaps and Potters and others.

Brewer also points out the fraud in Teeters video - the one where he sandbagged a mac26x and was able to flip her but only with the mast down. This presentation meant to descredit a superior and proven design.

"Having the weight of the rig aloft greatly increases the boat's transverse moment of inertia, in other words, its resistance to the kind of snap and roll that can occur when hit by breaking sea."

SailDesign

08-20-2005, 03:13 PM

"Having the weight of the rig aloft greatly increases the boat's transverse moment of inertia, in other words, its resistance to the kind of snap and roll that can occur when hit by breaking sea."

Just goes to prove that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing... And mighie has VERY little knowledge when it comes to naval architecture.
Steve

Skippy

08-20-2005, 03:38 PM

Spaghetto: Teeters ... was able to flip [a mac26x] but only with the mast down. ...
"Having the weight of the rig aloft greatly increases the boat's transverse moment of inertia, in other words, its resistance to the kind of snap and roll that can occur when hit by breaking sea."

So Frank, how high were the breakers in the little pond they did their test in?

mighetto

08-21-2005, 01:59 PM

Just goes to prove that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing... And mighie has VERY little knowledge when it comes to naval architecture.
Steve

Oh I think I am fast coming through my amature designer phase. Yes I am ready to take on the professionals. Lets try this out. The Internet is blasting the hell out of the professions because so much of what would have been secret or discussed only in cloisters is now available on the world wide web. So Steve, try to keep up. Make a comment or two on the following. Keep your sailors wit about you.

Ted Brewer in Good Old Boat March 2005, stated that boat designers in the 1950s through 1970s, himself included, were influenced by ocean racing design rules. These rules ignored the advantages of fractional rigs because there was a rating advantage in going with a smaller-sail-area mast head arrangement. His controversial article claims that vessels designed in this time period were purposefully under canvassed for ocean-racing-rating advantage and that Genoas became popular because they represented a way of getting more suitable sail area on these designs. Genoas provided a loop hole in the design rules in other words. A Genoa is usually 50 percent larger than the standard jib for that vessel.

Today many view mast head sloops as ocean crossing vessels and fractional rig vessels inappropriate for that work. But there are no physics supporting this belief. Mast head sloop rigging is an artifact of ocean racer design rules and nothing more because a fractional rig sloop can assume mast head configuration just by reefing. Furthermore, Brewer states that - in the absence of the design rules - there will be a trend to smaller head sails and larger mains (like on the M). His statements are based on old head sail technology, however.

Prior to 1999, head sails on rollers did not include necessary reinforcement so that they could be rolled in further than jib size. This meant that it was easier to reef the main when conditions warranted that. Because head sails like those standard on a MacGregor Yachts can be rolled to storm sail size, they are easier to reef than the main. This is probably true on most sloops with roller reefing (as opposed to furling) systems. They also can be rolled in while tacking and backed out again so that there is no disadvantage (in comparison to a jib) in maneuvering. Brewer in Good Old Boat August 2005 argues against roller furling head sails in smaller offshore yachts. He challenges his readers to disagree, which I now do.

The added weight aloft of the roller mechanism is minimal (about the amount of a pulley). There is no problem there. Rolled head sails can be removed from their stays just as a sail using a tuff luff is. It need not remain on the stay as Brewer implies. In fact, sailors now know to remove the sails from the rollers even when in port during storms and hurricanes. The owners manual for the Mac26x instructs operators to drop the mast in extreme conditions. This is analogous to chopping down masts which captains would order when caught in extreme conditions during the days of commercial sail. This valuable heavy weather technique is not available to a vessel with a keel mounted aluminum mast. Deck stepped masts are superior when such mounting allows the mast to be dropped.

The only potential disadvantage to a rolled Genoa on the Mac26x is that when the Genoa is rolled in to a smaller size there might be a decrease in performance. However, a rolled head sail is like a vertical batten, its performance might be better in some conditions and often reduced performance is not a concern when the objective is to depower anyway. The idea that a storm jib can be positioned low to the deck is silly when you think of sea spray that requires the storm jib to be raised anyway. Macgregor Yachts instructs its operators to use the rolled Genoa as a storm jib.

Brewer does make interesting points about plugging the aluminum mast on both ends and not installing inner halyards. The air trapped inside the mast prevents some vessels from turning turtle after a capsize. However so does side floatation and ocean worthy freeboard, like on the Mac26x.

Brewer, spends some time explaining the difference between a cutter and a double headsail sloop in his earlier article. This discussion has high value for Mac26x owners and those considering ocean crossings. He argues that there is safety in having a second head stay and that combinations of the double-head rigs are desirable in heavy weather. If the single head stay gives way the mast could be lost unless something like a solid boom vang has been mounted. In the later article he implies that carbon fiber masts are foolhardy because ultra-light rigging does not provide transverse moment of inertia enough to resist the kind of snap roll that can happen in a breaking sea.

Can we chat about the content of the above rather than me now? I love Brewer because I believe he writes in a way that gets readers to think. Unfortunately the foolish take what he says at face value without analysis. Let Fly

SailDesign

08-21-2005, 02:14 PM

Oh I think I am fast coming through my amature designer phase. Yes I am ready to take on the professionals.
You have a long ways to go, Migho. That does not stop Mr. Brewer from making accurate observations, but it has stopped you from drawing the correct conclusions from them.
I would suggest going to school/college for at least a year to study yacht design (3 would be preferable). There are many courses available. Then spend 25 years in the business. Then, and ONLY then, go back and re-read these threads. I guarantee you will be embarrassed as heck.
Steve

mighetto

08-21-2005, 02:26 PM

You have a long ways to go, Migho. That does not stop Mr. Brewer from making accurate observations, but it has stopped you from drawing the correct conclusions from them.
I would suggest going to school/college for at least a year to study yacht design (3 would be preferable). There are many courses available. Then spend 25 years in the business. Then, and ONLY then, go back and re-read these threads. I guarantee you will be embarrassed as heck.
Steve

Embarrased for you perhaps. You still do not get it. In times of fast technology change, of which this is one for monohull sailing, anyone claiming to have more than 5 years of experience is delusonal. You will be changing your views just as Perry and Brewer are if you care about your craft.

For example, any analysis of design that pretends that speed is not important (for safety and comfort) is faulty from the get go. Any that ignores the very real objective of designing sailboats that can be crewed by two likewize so. Any promoting vessels that sink when flooded ditto. Virtually all analysis from the east coast, with the exception of folks like Bolger (and a few brave others) requires out of hand rejection based on the track record of utter design failure established there. TP52s argh - lets go there only as required.

Dance with me. The music is wonderful right now. There may not be a better time to discuss Surviving Capsize. Page 14 Good Old Boat. See especially the table on page 16. Alas - speed is not a row. Other than an Internet school, I doubt schools can keep up with the significant change in design thinking now taking place.

Roger MacGregor

08-21-2005, 03:46 PM

You, Frank, are an embarrassment to the MacGregor 26x owners community. I'm ashamed to see a delusional neophyte such as yourself misrepresenting our fine product.

usa2

08-21-2005, 04:42 PM

well said Mr. MacGregor.

K4s

08-22-2005, 01:04 AM

Presumably this new thinking is being done by graduates or members of these very schools,evolution of design is the process.Perhaps you should evolve or you may end up like the dinosaur.
You have a long ways to go, Migho. That does not stop Mr. Brewer from making accurate observations, but it has stopped you from drawing the correct conclusions from them.
I would suggest going to school/college for at least a year to study yacht design (3 would be preferable). There are many courses available. Then spend 25 years in the business. Then, and ONLY then, go back and re-read these threads. I guarantee you will be embarrassed as heck.
Steve

Embarrased for you perhaps. You still do not get it. In times of fast technology change, of which this is one for monohull sailing, anyone claiming to have more than 5 years of experience is delusonal. You will be changing your views just as Perry and Brewer are if you care about your craft.

For example, any analysis of design that pretends that speed is not important (for safety and comfort) is faulty from the get go. Any that ignores the very real objective of designing sailboats that can be crewed by two likewize so. Any promoting vessels that sink when flooded ditto. Virtually all analysis from the east coast, with the exception of folks like Bolger (and a few brave others) requires out of hand rejection based on the track record of utter design failure established there. TP52s argh - lets go there only as required.

Dance with me. The music is wonderful right now. There may not be a better time to discuss Surviving Capsize. Page 14 Good Old Boat. See especially the table on page 16. Alas - speed is not a row. Other than an Internet school, I doubt schools can keep up with the significant change in design thinking now taking place.