fast but lightweight cruiser

Well said Gary, I take back the prig comment, being insensitive is actually a good thing...

 

Geez, Cav, me old mate, me an insensitive prig? Insensitive - yes, guess so, rude, yes this'll be true (as the Kiwi says) ... but a prig, Nah mate, priggish means snooty and righteous - don't think that is me. If I was priggish (in MY forum thread) I'd impolitely say to these proa cranks, go away you crazed loonies. But I'm truly democratic (not the US interpretation either).
How's yer Aussie designed tri, mate? Cheers.

 

Miles say it all

Well that is great.

I was very excited to have someone who has done real miles in one of their own boats on the forum. That is one reason I really like having Richard here is because the designers I truly respect are those that design sail, build and sail their boats the way they expect others to. Designers like Russ Brown, Jim Brown, Lock Crowther, Nigel Irens and Peter Snell.

I saw Russ' proa in Cid Harbour back in 2001 or 2002 and was blown away by it. It looked very striking, like a Newick in some ways with its sheer and hollow section bow/stern. Russ saw me coming close and waved at me to stay away from the reef I was heading for - transfixed by this amazing boat. My family had Russ on board Kankama a couple of times and he impressed me as a serious seaman - a man with much well found knowledge based on empirical experience in amazing craft. I didn't get to sail Jzero but I hung around with Russ for a while watching her slide along. She looked so good and so right - very well designed and conceived. She is beautiful inside and had all the requirements for a well considered ocean cruiser. I could have spent many more hours on her looking at such a highly evolved creature and learning much for my own boats.

This is where we have lost a great amount. I come on this forum to learn. To understand more about the boats I love and so I rely on the free advice given by others. To do so requires some moderation and much tolerance.

I can't even begin to understand why Rob Denney tries to forensically dissect old articles, or others opinions on them instead of asking the people involved - Russ himself. I have written for magazines myself and often find that I have to target a specific audience. To label Russ' boats tender or wet because a writer says so in an article to a wide audience, used to Valiant 40s and high freeboard cats is probably correct. But to us on a forum where the boats are low and fast they are probably no wetter than a similar style craft. We could just ask Russ instead of searching through the back catalogue and trying to trip someone up.

I have interviewed quite a few good sailors and designers for magazines and none pull themselves up by bashing others. Irens lauded the work of Newick. Newick liked what Wharram did in the early days. Crowther liked the CSK boats but in the end these designers got their reputation by getting results. Boats crossing oceans and winning races. I look forward to when Rob can point to a voyage he has done in one of his own boats that is half as long as Jzero's Pacific run or where his boat is sitting in an anchorage and almost causes an accident because it is so beautiful.

Cheers

Phil

 

Agreed, please don't go away Russ, most, if not all of the enlightened Southern Antipodeans luv yer.
Now about that Alaska design; there are a few here very interested in seeing your sketches, plans and ideas.
I've got a few too.
In fact there are movements here; already there is a Tauranga raid/type race, wanting to enter this small boat, marathon-like, Everglades Challenge-type boat competition/adventure.

 

Russell, I think it's a shame this has resurfaced, I have mixed views on what has passed between you and Denney, as I have mixed views on the pacific/harry debate.
I have joined numerous forums trying to make sense of it and have yet to see any sensible discussion of the two forms that has not descended into a bitchy slanging match between the various fanboys before the topic has actually been discussed !
Please stick around, ignore this distraction and carry on discussing ply building as before.

 

You're right Gary, not snooty at all.....just misunderstood like all great artistic blokes.

The Nicol is doing great, it took us to the North end of Vancouver Island this summer. I've had to put patches on the main this fall as my 1960s tri budget hasn't updated with inflation. It is faster than most boats of it's era, Russel's dad Jim warned me on the phone about the dangers of machismo when he heard what we sail but it is really a nice gentle ride compared to modern Ferrarri's. My crew ,my son, got into Stanford this year and they gave him a scholarship when they found out what my boat is so cheers there too! The daggerboard trunk is in but the slot won't get put in till next year...

I've seen one of Russel's proas too and they are beautiful, fast even sitting still as the wind and light hurry around them. I think there are many sailors today who are tuned into their boats and the water who would want to fly such creatures.


There is also nothing wrong with utility and bang for the buck, strong points for Rob. Interestingly the old tri designers used to slang each others boats for marketing and some are still sensitive about it. I tried to get Ed Horstman to contribute to outrig.org but he still didn't want to involve himself with the crowd that put those comparisons in the Searunner catalog! Hopefully we'll let the old sales techniques die off so the designs can evolve. As I remind myself, while nasty things may be said in the past we should be allowed to get past them to embrace the future.

 

Thanks so much for the comments and support.
I do have to acknowledge that it was me that started this one by telling my feelings about Rob to Gary on a public forum. My bad.

I do still find it unbelievable the way this whole thing has gone down.
Rob was always free to explore his ideas and concepts without criticism from anyone, least of all me. Why then criticize proven concepts to support your own ideas? I just don't get it.

It's very true that I was shy about promoting proas. I still am. Who in their right mind would want to encourage someone to go to sea in an experimental multihull, especially someone who doesn't really want to be a designer as a livelihood.

It's also true that the rigs on my boats are not stayed as well on the lee side as would be ideal. The reality is that the staying angles are pretty good and of the four proas I have built there has never been a dismasting.
With well over 40,000 ocean miles sailed, never losing a rig is pretty good, especially when this particular rig is so light and works so well on a proa.
Were these facts ever talked about? No, what was brought up literally hundreds of times was what Steve Callahan said in his article about our trip across the Pacific.
What Steve said didn't bother me, why should it be ammunition for damning the boat and all boats like it.

My first $400 proa had a crossarm failure on it's first trip. It got new beams and went on to sail many thousands of sea miles and was very hard to beat on the race course.
Besides that, my boats (so far) all have a perfect safety record. I have never seen even a stress crack, even after many decades and more than a few gales at sea.
How could someone whose boats have no sea miles (except for one very slow Tasman crossing where the boat had a major structural issue) see fit to find fault with my boats.

The rudder issue, again used by Rob hundred of times, is another example of how ridiculous this whole thing is. I use Newick style rudders in trunks and they provide excellent control always, even at high speeds in big waves. I have not in all these miles had any issues with them. I'm sure I've been lucky not to hit anything, but so is everyone who uses dagger boards and non kick-up rudders.
So how can steering be another way to discredit my boats?
My opinion is that Rob will eventually use the Newick rudders on his boats. It's the only way to achieve good control on boats like this. Not true? Well than show me it's not true.

My point here is that discrediting prior and well proven concepts is no way to prove a concept. Rob should stop the B.S. and show us that his boats work.
So far, all I have seen is far from impressive.
For the record, this is farther than I have ever gone in criticizing Rob's boats.
Russell

 

Let it go gents, time will tell.....advertising often involves shooting at the perceived competition.
Speaking of the Alaska run Meade Gougeon's last Florida boat would be competitive here. For those windless days I wonder how well pedal power would work.

 

It's good to see boats like Madness and the Bieker 32 continue the carry the Pacific proa tradition. It would be great to see Bucket list side by side with a Bieker 32.

 

I don't know if I am typical or what. But I have multiple plans by Marples, Wharram and Hughes. I got a free plan from Newick. John Marples sold me his trailer plan at an incredibly reasonable price, when he knew I was putting my Hughes on it. Jim Brown was very nice to me when i took a course from him on the CC 23 to get my spirits up to complete my Hughes. He has provided some support on a few occasions since. I had a little money when Rob Denny came out with his proa plans, and after 20 years waiting for a cruising "proa" plan I bought a set. Mostly bought because I wanted to be a patron, I don't really need an experimental boat at this stage of the game (10 years ago). Recently I bought Russ's excellent epoxy book partly due to the Brown Heritage (I learned a bit from Steve during that course also), but also because Kurt Hughes had such nice things to say about Russ I wished I had been able to see what he saw. I made a trip to Port Townsend once, in the hope of making a walk by on Russ's boat, but it was a spur of a moment thing, and I didn't find it. Rob Denny is always helpful when one asks him questions too. I find him very helpful on general boat building, and find I have learned a lot from various builders in Australia over the years. He put me in touch with Oram, who was also helpful, and so it rolls on and on.

Mostly we all learn from everyone, and sometimes need more than one person when we get stuck into a project. When I design and build a project from scratch as I also have been doing since around 1979, I normally find the whole process easier. I don't need to understand stuff I don't understand. I build with the materials and understanding I have at hand. Often the difficulties arise building other people's stuff because of matters of interpretation, and difficulty finding materials. I need other people's help more when I build other people's plans. All the people in the field make each other possible.

 

The "buoyant boom thingy" is a box section wishbone boom mounted 1.8m off the deck. This keeps it above head height on the tramp in the event of an accidental gybe and allows the foot of the sail to vang the main and bend the mast. Means the total running rigging is 4 lines, one single speed winch, 4 double blocks, 2 horn cleats and a cam cleat. There is no standing rigging.

A capsize is unlikely as there is an auto reset fuse on the mainsheet cam cleat, no jibs or other extras to worry about and no stays to prevent the main being eased as far as is required, even on a broad reach. The fuse can be set for any angle of heel or pitch. If it does capsize, the sealed mast mounted in the lee hull stops the boat capsizing past 90 degrees. If the boom is then pulled below the water, it has enough buoyancy to right the boat. With a removable 2m strut off the mast at deck level (not shown in the animation), the boom can be winched under the water with the main sheet. The crew do not need to get in the water, may not even get wet if they stand on the hull, mast or rope ladder.

That was the original plan. However, the possibility of the boat sailing away when righted, leaving crew behind was a bit of a worry. Therefore, we have reduced the size of the boom so that the sail has to be lowered before the boat can be righted. This may have the secondary effect of stopping charterers capsizing for the fun of it, which is not recommended beyond swimming distance from shore.

If the boat capsizes and you are hanging from your safety harness, you need to swing into the tramp (which is vertical, you will be blown against it when the boat swings round with the mast pointing upwind), and use the rope ladder which is tied to the tramp. This will allow you to get safely up to the winch and the ww hull, or down to the mast. This is a pretty unusual scenario as the only hook on locations are the mesh of the tramp. More likely is that you are either in the windward hull or tethered to the jack line, so you will slide down the tramp to the base of the mast.

No idea if you ever get over to this coast, but if you do, let me know and I will take you for a sail and show you how it all works.

Cav,
Thanks for a balanced point of view. Baigent has been stirring since he was in the cradle. If he wasn't such a knowledgable, friendly, innovative, helpful, can do sort of bloke, he would be a total prick. Must be a kiwi thing. ;-)
The bows on the early harrys were full because "the experts" said proas would sail bow down. Has not been a problem on harrys (due, as far as I can tell, to zero rocker hulls) so later boats have much finer bows. They are very fine on Bucket List.
Equal length hulls are a good idea if you want catamaran space, but I find the short ww hulled proa motion far nicer than the corkscrewing cat motion. Kind of like a mono, without the heeling. If length was not a consideration (proas can't have fat sterns), a shunting catamaran would be preferable to a tacking cat, in a lot of ways.

Russ,
From your articles:
"Of course my boats have weak points." and "I hope that my observations help in the future development of these boats." It is the weak points that I tried to remedy with harryproas. Mostly successfully. Your refusal to discuss harrys, while continually denigrating me and them, does not help with the "development of these boats".
Until you started the ugly personal stuff, i only ever described you as a skilled boatbuilder, nice guy (we met 30 odd years ago) and consumate seaman. And Jzerro as a great boat, but with weak points (your words). If you want to discuss the articles you quoted, and can stop the personal abuse, I am happy to start a new thread.
Re humble pie. I have eaten heaps of it during the ~20 years i have been designing, building and sailing proas. The ability to do so is in large part why harrys have kept evolving. And selling.
Reply to your other post is seperate

If you had posted this after Russ' obnoxious post #112, and he had taken your advice, this would all have been avoided. For the rest of your comments about me, read my previous post (you obviously haven't), particularly the shooting the messenger bit and Russ refusing to discuss boats on boat discussion forums.
Trying to link the mast falling down in a gybe to the wetness of the boat is clutching at straws.

Thom,
You were one of the first supporters of harryproa. It has not been forgotten and I am very grateful. Maybe I could repay your faith with a free charter of BL? I will email you when I know what is going on.

rob

 

James Brett has also done some good things with proas.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_ILYfWTEbk

The Harry Proas do seem to have a slight bow down attitude, but it doesn't appear to be excessive. Might get more pronounced in a blow.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wftyqI2aJlo

 

My mind is as pure as the driven snow (smiles) - and I had zero intention of re-stirring up the underground, barely suppressed, buzzing and poisonous wasp nest. You two. And various disciples. You know who you are.
Okay, here's my "democratic" viewpoint:
All three of the proa concepts are superb. There is no more a minimalist boat than a proa, meaning they are the lightest, "lowest material" multihull, therefore they are the fastest. A variation, but with a very important foil, is Vestas Sailrocket, worlds fastest sailing craft. By far.
Russell's flying proas are works of art and go though the water with elegance and easy speed, a beautiful thing to watch. I want a sail.
Rob's Rocket Bucket is brilliant; you should have done it years ago, continued on after Elementary.
Proa evolution and refinement will continue from you two (and others). These are VERY interesting nautical times.

 

+1
I hope Russ continues to post here, as his contributions are the result of experience. It would be a bummer if he stopped posting.


Gary,
Do you have a weight estimate for your crusier?
How much volume do you put in your floats? I think low volume floats with foils would work well when the boat is moving, but what about when you tack in heavy air? Do you have to ease the main until you get enough boat speed until the foil starts working? I guess my question is how did you determine the volume you believe the floats require?

 

Here is an idea for everyone to contemplate...I was kickng around the whole external rudder and or dagger concept and realized a variation of the outboard sled could be used to give a top plate for the foils to fight cavitation and give more support to the blade than a beam cantilever. Water stays would be used from the sled to give it support, retractable and kick up of course.


I'll call it the

Cav
Anti-cavitation
Rudder/
Daggerboard
Sled

Now people can race by playing their CARDS right....or if things go wrong talk about having built a house of CARDS.....