Aftmast rigs???

If you are so annoyed, then I suggest you ignore this subject thread. BTW, this is a forum discussion where EVERYONE can offer their opinions...not just certain snobbish designers.

You brought this subject up previously if I remember correctly. and I pointed out that BOTH my mizzen and staysail (main) were SELF-TACKING. It was only necessary to tack the genoa headsail, and even that could be delayed until after the turn was completed.

I think part of your 'annoyance' with this sail plan (and me maybe) is that your client insisted on using such a sailplan above your objections. That's the only reason I can think of for you to have utilized the rig....as you certainly are objectionable about it. So go read some other threads, and take your nasty demeanor with you.

 

Yes, if those opinions based on facts and experience. You know no facts, and have no experience (and no qualification) to discuss the work done by us.

This is not first time You discussing our projects in such manner. Few years ago You posted photos of our 87' trimaran on yachforums, making conclusions without even being on board and without knowledge that it was a refit project. If You just come on board and ask me to show the boat - I will explain why and what is done. But You choose another tactics - entertaining Your audience with Your own ill-informed guesses!

For decades, You fool people with advantages of aft-mast rig that has never been tested by You. Why don't You put big red disclaimer on Your web saying 'this type of rig is not tested'? You are referenced on many multihull websites as as yacht designer - the designer who has never built any boat!

In theory - yes. YOUR mizzen and jibs are tested... on paper only.

My annoyance comes from fact that someone is writing about design mistakes to the builder, without seeing drawings and boat. No professional will do it.

That 40' client basically has no sailing experience. This is the reason why this junk seems attractive to him, after reading convincing writings of 'aft-mast professor'.

 

without going into this argument, i do like the idea and looks of that motorsailer in post #254
so if it performs reasonably well i would think something new and good has resulted from it all

 

Overall it performs as good as similar cat (SA/weight) with conventional rig. This boat has got very narrow hulls, only 1.1m at WL for 40' length. But windward performance is worse due to slack of stays, wider sails (i.e. lower aspect ratio) and reduced abilities for sails tuning. This boat has no main ('mizzen' in Brian's terms), only 2 jibs.

Setting main/mizzen hang on spreader does not seem feasible.

 

Many engineers that has never built anything. Many architects has never picked up a brick and laid mortar on it. Neither has many very fine boat designers ever applied a layer of glass. Many civel engineers cannot weld but their bridges get put up.

I for one am glad that Brian Eiland had the aft mast rig on his website Alik. If you have a personal score to settle then take it off the forum. Some critic is welcome but keep it unipersonal. We don't care who said what elsewhere, or what happened, it has no bearing on this thread.

 

This is not the issue; the issue is that no aft-mast boat 'designed' by Brian has ever been built by anyone.

P.S. I can weld and do FRP work. And I built my first 3.6m dinghy design myself, at the age of 14 How one can do engineering work without understanding the process?

The argument started from Brian's claim that something is wrong in the rig (without having seen it). If he pretends to 'review' our designs, then I retain the right to review his experience and qualifications.

 

What does it matter ? He has always been involved with it and has always been in favour of it as far as I can tell. No one was interested in it up to now, I don't think it would be fair to discredit him because it wasn't precisely 'his boat'.

Every person here has a skill and some knowledge no one else have, the idea would be to benefit from it and enhance your own. Let's build on that !

 

I agree that he is a dreamer and enthusiast, but he is not really a designer as he does not design (and build) anything to his designs. And also not a design expert capable to 'review' the designs developed (and tested) by professionals.

Let's treat each others as colleagues here; no mentors and 'professors'. And it will work.

 

Well in that case I'm a dreamer too and so is a lot of other people here. Just look in their boat design galleries. I have designed many many things I never made or built. He did however make some drawings which those that chooses can benefit from, so it wasn't all only dreaming.

There is a time to teach and there is a time to learn. I find no shame in it to learn from someone else, I do find shame in not knowing enough.

 

It is normal that some designs are built, some are not. But at certain stage some pictures should start becoming real stuff. But if someone is drawing pictures for 30 years without having a single boat built - is he a boat designer?

Those are not drawings but pictures. How about mizzen hang on spreader? Is there any engineering behind?

Exactly! And someone who has never tested the boat (never designed, never built, etc.) should probably listen those who did. Listen with respect at least like colleagues, not like professor listening a remedial student.

 

Where are some sailing photos, ...and a current rig dwg

You posted some photos of the boat, but nothing under sail...and its the rig we are discussing??

And since your office did the design perhaps we could see an updated dwg that shows the 'as built' rigging rather than the only dwg that was forwarded to me??

 

I was on the boat when we did sea trails under sails; so could not picture the boat from outside

We have complete set of rig drawings, including details of mast, chainplates, etc. And these drawings show 2 pairs for backstays. It is how it was first - designed and then - built.

So You say You have dwg? Wonder where You can get it, I never gave dwg to anyone, even to builder, only pdf and printed copy.

What is the reason for forwarding/showing dwg or other plans to You? Who You are? Certification body? NO. Expert? NO. Customer? NO. Explain me the reason why I should give this information to You?

 

Builder Notes

Interesting...seems to be working out according to the builder.

I suggested to the builder that we hold off on this 'announcement' about the boat's success until more testing had been done.....specificlly so it would not be misleading information until further testing was done.

BTW, here is a portion of the note I sent to the builder:

As you can discern from my note to the builder, I had 'read' the photos and dwg the builder sent me incorrectly, and thus my concern for the loads at the hounds as I saw no masthead bacstay, nor lower backstays.

 

I want to get away from this silly argument as well. I resisted replying to Alik's continued attacks on me till I could no longer ignore it. He has some sort of ax to burn with me, so hopefully he will get a life and move on to other subjects.

Yes, that vessel does appear to be a nice looking rendition, and the builder seems to be satisfied,...and is building several more.

 

Yes, it seems to work out; but there are no real advantages, and there are some difficulties as I expected. Also pls note that it is our design that works, not Yours

For Your notes sent to the builder - who is interested to read it and reply on that? Be realistic, You do not have any professional knowledge to give such comments.