Hogfish Maximus - 44ish sailing sharpie?

[DennisRB]

Originally Posted by waikikin

Here's something "similar" from Fitzgibbon- for your interest. Regards from Jeff. http://www.boatpoint.com.au/boats-fo...aspx?R=8895063

Thanks. That also an interesting boat. I saw it for sale probably over a year ago.

[tom28571]

Originally Posted by BriggsMonteith

I believe Kirby put a shallow ballast fin on the 43 to keep the boat in the light category, if memory serves me correct the 43 was somewhere around 18000#

Yes, it does have a shallow ballast keel enclosing a centerboard. I'd prefer that to inside ballast on a flat bottom hull for greater righting moment at less weight. I would agree that it is not built heavy since Kirby would be interested in performance. I watched the boat being built in various stages. One anomaly for me was that it sported a B&R rig that is usually reserved for high performance boats. For me it would be a candidate for an unstayed carbon rig.

[BriggsMonteith]

I remember when Mark Bayne was building that boat, I was not very interested in the sharpie concept at the time, but Mark insisted that the boat was going to be a real rocket ship...there are a few things other than performance that Morejohn was considering when he built HFM, Rumor has it that he was run down by more than one container ship and left treading water a couple of times before building the first smaller hogfish (I'm still dumbfounded as to how that could happen more than once) but he deveoped the N.O.R.T.H.E. method which stands for "Nothing Other Really Thought Heavy Enough". the second advantage is there are no appendage left vulnerable (Flat Bottom and skeg hung rudder) and the Third is there is plenty of room and reserve displacement for extra fuel, water,stores, banjos, or anything you could possibly want to carry along.

I think I too would prefer something slightly lighter myself.

[DennisRB]

Anyone got pics or links to the Kirby 43 in question?

[BriggsMonteith]

Try this website under plans, though I think you'll find it much less commodious than HFM: http://www.nisboats.com/

Briggs

[DennisRB]

Thanks. It looks like a nice easy and cheap to build boat. The draft is very shallow at 3 foot, but it looses the ability to beach with the stub keel.





Also is there any actual advantage other than cost and build time to not have any more chines? Would an extra chine in the middle not be better in every way other than that? If not why not? 4 chines would still have a small flat surface to beach on as my plywood trailer sailer.

Thanks.

[BriggsMonteith]

Originally Posted by DennisRB

Thanks. It looks like a nice easy and cheap to build boat. The draft is very shallow at 3 foot, but it looses the ability to beach with the stub keel.





Also is there any actual advantage other than cost and build time to not have any more chines? Would an extra chine in the middle not be better in every way other than that? If not why not? 4 chines would still have a small flat surface to beach on as my plywood trailer sailer.

Thanks.

I personally don't see any advantage in adding an extra chine, I think your efforts would be better spent making an arc or v-bottom, especially aft, kind of like that aluminum sharpie that was posted earlier.

[BriggsMonteith]

The bouyancy centers will change when you change the angles of the topsides, making a more tender boat.

[DennisRB]

I thought the Alloy one was flat? When I say one extra chine, I really meant a V bottom. Same thing? I thought the V bottom would give more headroom, less pounding and a lower overall weight as the ballast on the bottom would be further down creating more righting moment. But if you made a flat section on the very bottom of the V (4 chines) it could still be beached without tipping. This is how my 25 foot trailer sailer hull is constructed. But it has a 500kg swinging keel. Obviously you can not make movable ballast for a boat this big cheaply so it must be fixed to the bottom. I guess this is why Hogfish Maximus is so heavy? I though a V might allow for a lighter boat. The Kirby 43 has a stub keel instead. I wonder if with a V this could have been avoided? So wonder what the disadvantages of a V would be?



Obviously this Ovni is at the opposite end of cheap construction but has multi chines and internal ballast. I just wonder if an added a V could be worth it for a cheaply constructed yacht with internal ballast, and if it would be a good idea or not.

[BriggsMonteith]

Hi Dennis,
Look a little bit closer at the bottom of this boat, I believe she's an arc bottom girl!

[DennisRB]

Originally Posted by BriggsMonteith

Hi Dennis,
Look a little bit closer at the bottom of this boat, I believe she's an arc bottom girl!

Ok will do. It just appeared to be flat. I will take a closer look. Sorry for editing my last post after you posted. I did not think anyone was reading this thread right now.

[DennisRB]

Yes that Alloy one does appear to have a curve as its chine is sitting well above the sand. A curve or V would surely be better in every way other than cost and ease of construction would it not?

[BriggsMonteith]

The Ovni is basicly a keel boat with a retractable keel, form stability does not come into play with righting moment...Ovnis are cool boats! Have you checked out Barros Yacht Design they have this one for aluminum construction, but it might be worth contacting Roberto: http://www.yachtdesign.com.br/02_ing...ult41sk-2.html

Peace Briggs

[tom28571]

Originally Posted by DennisRB

Thanks. It looks like a nice easy and cheap to build boat. The draft is very shallow at 3 foot, but it looses the ability to beach with the stub keel.
Thanks.

Not so, the rudders serve as three point balancing points and it will ground out level.

Also cheap is relative. Any boat this size and finished out like this one will not be cheap.

[BriggsMonteith]

Excellent point, Tom.