OK... would someone explain this to me? ...

It's too bad as the hull, from the photos seems to have good potential. Certainly agree on the rigging as an experiment gone bad, however there is some salvage asset there also, so not all is lost. If the hull passed a good tire kicking and the price was say "pay the storage fees cheap" this would be a serious contender as a base for a live aboard vessel for the right hands on person that wants to step up in size. What can i say I'm a bit of an experimemter myself and have always been attracted to odd ball gear of the female gender that needs saving

A yacht is not defined by the vessel but by the care and love of her owner (In my case thruout life possibly quite a true statement)

 

Perceptive

The tabernacles are simple enough on deck - large aluminum jaws with a large pin through the eye(s). This mounts through the deck to the underlying frame(s) (also aluminum) which are formed to the hull and truss bolted through down to the just above the waterline. The frames would put excessive stresses on a normal hull. This is not a normal hull, being of kevlar and rod glass and high-performance resin. The shape is wineglass and quite narrow here for a boat this length (perhaps only 8' and change). The arcs of the hull are very thick from waterline down. Again not a "normal" hull. It is all massive and extremely stout. There is no sign of cracking anywhere and there is no bulkhead here. Masterfully accomplished. Appreciate your interest.

 

Not quite.

That's why there is two jibs.

The outer one is struck first, moving the Horizontal Center of Area (HCA) aft slightly. Then the inner jib is roller reefed moving the HCA forward again, producing good helm balance, if designed right.

 

Take all the sails down and the center of the sail plan is on top of the rudder,...not the keel. Sounds like a dog to me

 

I'm confused, is there someone here seriously considering buying this vessel with the idea of continuing to use whats left of this experimental rigging and sail arrangement ? I'll be honest I'd like to own the hull would seriously build a modern Marco Polo out of it. As such I think it would be a very economical boat to operate. Anyone notice that big 3 blade folding prop, that alone must be worth a few serious bucks. This thing has potential but not with that rig.---

 

I dont think the hull could be salvaged. The huge cut outs in the deck have comprimised its structural integrity as a sailing yacht.

Many top class ex race boats around ,for cheap, that have not been bastardized. I recently saw a 45 ft alloy 1980s racer sell for 40 grand. Very nice boat.

 

That's how it works

Correct. Only our rig has boom on staysail so better in a storm than a roller you cannot flatten out and bite down. Works similar to a storm jib on a "normal" rig in terms of sail effect. Have not had to reef it....yet.
As to other posts re "cut outs" being too big. These lockers have crash bulkhead forward in foam filled compartment. Aft bulkhead also extremely stout with midship longitudinal deck to keel to back it up. Hatches are reinforced kevlar and again stoutly appointed. Not something we leave open, but not losing sleep over it either. Built to take whatever. It is difficult to describe the temper of this vessel to people who use production boats as reference.

 

Not quite true.

You have the bundles of both furled jibs creating plenty of aerodynamic drag.

Your general premiss is correct, though. This boat should, depending on what her under body looks like, round up into the wind with all sail struck, and ride pretty much heaved to.

The bundles of the furled jibs would probably keep it from pointing directly into the wind.

I'm not sure that is such a bad thing under bare poles.

if I had 27k I would consider buying it.

 

Hoyt in his article is the only one who makes an important point, that this rig produces lift that partly offsets the wind's heeling moment. This makes it appropriate for a narrow hull such as this one. As heel increases the lift increases, the opposite of a conventional mast and sail where the draft off the sail starts to head upwards instead of sternwards converting thrust to more heeling moment. I have been wanting to try a variant of this type of rig on my kayak, a hull type with particularly limited stability, since the rig is theoretically capable of being setup to produce zero heeling moment. This rig does not belong on a beamy hull where this feature is not needed.

 

I'm afraid Hoyt is wrong.

If you look at the lift vector you will see it tends to lift the bow, somewhat like a spinnaker down wind. It does nothing about the heeling moment.

Such a rig on a canoe would require at least a back stay and two spreaders to maintain decent fore stay tension for the windward performance we have come to expect.

A pdracer was built in Hong Kong, I believe, that had a mast aft rig with just a free standing mast. The mast was just a few inches from the transom, so there was no room for a back stay. It was also stepped off the center line of the boat. It seemed to work OK. The owner never complained about inadequate windward performance. Pdracers usually tack through 100 degrees.

I guess a crude version of this rig will work with flat cut sails with maybe a hollow cut in the luff.

Windward performance may not be the greatest, but maybe at least adequate.

 

I disagree; if it lifts the bow, or any other part of the boat, when off the lee beam, it would generate a moment counter to the heeling moment.

Intuitively - since I haven't figured out how to draw the force vector diagram - I suspect the sail can be set to produce zero heeling moment, although it may not be the most efficient from a driving point of view.

I have experimented with a related sail type, an equilateral triangular sail set symmetrically on a mast with two booms. The rig was mounted on the gunnel so it was offset from the centerline, and its peak was canted inwards. On a reach it was set with its leading edge more or less above the centerline of the hull, approximating a lateen, and it definitely reduced heeling moment, Since it was used on a kayak, not much stability and a small cockpit that did not permit hiking, that was essential.

 

If it WERE a good performer, there would be more boats like this around.
If one has the money for an experiment - why not spend it? But don't think that you'll ever get your money back if you decide to sell it later.

 

I don't like the shape of that hull. A sailboat hull is like female body - it needs hips. This one is too narrow, doesn't look optimized for sailing with heel.

 

Its a pupose built, light displacement , west coast, downwind speedster. a Bill Lee santa cruz type hull.


http://www.fastisfun.com/blboats/sc50brochure/sc50.htm

 

- also a reasonably economical upwind power cruiser I would guess . . .