Incredible "Secrets of Yacht Design" website located...

[asathor]

+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]

Originally Posted by 101

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]

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]

Originally Posted by asathor

+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]

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]

Originally Posted by asathor

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]

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]

Originally Posted by mistral

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]

Originally Posted by asathor

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]

Originally Posted by mighetto

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]

Originally Posted by mistral

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]

Originally Posted by mighetto

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]

[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;

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]

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

[mighetto]

Originally Posted by mistral

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.



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.