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

[Roger MacGregor]

You, Frank, are an embarrassment to the MacGregor 26x owners community. I'm ashamed to see a delusional neophyte such as yourself misrepresenting our fine product.

[usa2]

well said Mr. MacGregor.

[K4s]

Presumably this new thinking is being done by graduates or members of these very schools,evolution of design is the process.Perhaps you should evolve or you may end up like the dinosaur.

Originally Posted by mighetto

You have a long ways to go, Migho. That does not stop Mr. Brewer from making accurate observations, but it has stopped you from drawing the correct conclusions from them.
I would suggest going to school/college for at least a year to study yacht design (3 would be preferable). There are many courses available. Then spend 25 years in the business. Then, and ONLY then, go back and re-read these threads. I guarantee you will be embarrassed as heck.
Steve

Embarrased for you perhaps. You still do not get it. In times of fast technology change, of which this is one for monohull sailing, anyone claiming to have more than 5 years of experience is delusonal. You will be changing your views just as Perry and Brewer are if you care about your craft.

For example, any analysis of design that pretends that speed is not important (for safety and comfort) is faulty from the get go. Any that ignores the very real objective of designing sailboats that can be crewed by two likewize so. Any promoting vessels that sink when flooded ditto. Virtually all analysis from the east coast, with the exception of folks like Bolger (and a few brave others) requires out of hand rejection based on the track record of utter design failure established there. TP52s argh - lets go there only as required.

Dance with me. The music is wonderful right now. There may not be a better time to discuss Surviving Capsize. Page 14 Good Old Boat. See especially the table on page 16. Alas - speed is not a row. Other than an Internet school, I doubt schools can keep up with the significant change in design thinking now taking place.

[Mark 42]

This reminds me of a group of people who are going about claiming
"Bernoulli Was Wrong!".

None of these people actually have degrees in physics or fluid
dynamics or aerospace engineering, but they claim that those
who have traditional education in the subject are too brain-
washed to recognize that Bernoulli had it all wrong.

[NorthLight]

There are a lot of aspects of designing a great sailing yacht. One of these is aestetics. The MacGregor looks like the bastard child of a stinkpot and a fat cruising boat. I've sailed short fat boats like these before, like O'day 25's, they have very poor sailboat qualities.

I love people who just don't get it that everyone keeps threads like this going just to "push their button." If it's a matter of pride, keep on defending your ugly boat.

[mighetto]

Originally Posted by NorthLight

There are a lot of aspects of designing a great sailing yacht. One of these is aestetics. The MacGregor looks like the bastard child of a stinkpot and a fat cruising boat. I've sailed short fat boats like these before, like O'day 25's, they have very poor sailboat qualities.

I love people who just don't get it that everyone keeps threads like this going just to "push their button." If it's a matter of pride, keep on defending your ugly boat.

O'days are Costa Mesa builds arn't they. I suspect you object to ocean worthy freeboard.

Mac26x vessels ride high but not excessively, not without grace, with inherent beauty by my eye, and unlike many sailboats the freeboard doesn't vary much when heeled.



The most important disadvantage of high freeboard on a recreational vessel involves retrieving a MOB (man overboard). Many ocean sailboats carry life slings which are a tool used for hoisting MOBs. Modern designs (like the X boat) have low freeboard at the stern that make unnecessary life slings. High freeboard provides stability. It is hard to knock down let alone capsize a sailboat with ocean worthy freeboard. High freeboard improves buoyancy with no decrease in hull speed.

Low freeboard made sense during the age of marine hunting when it facilitated the work necessary to process the catch or to row. But with low freeboard a modest amount of heel will put the rail under the water. This slows the vessel down considerably and in the extreme can sink the vessel. It is a safety issue.

Low freeboard sailiing vessels are considered appropriate for inland protected waters. These vessels are fine for pleasure use. Pleasure boats - by definition - are toys, and they are not expected to be operated outside of the bath tub environment of a small lake or bay. I do not consider Mac26x boats toys. They are recreational vessels designed specifically for ocean use with appropriate freeboard for that purpose.

Agree with me that it is those who are unhappy with their own boats that are most likely to object to the Future of Yacht design. This future does imply incorperating what has been learned from multi hulls - (the sh;t should float when swamped) and from power boats.

Thankyou for opening the Church of The Future of Yacht Design (FOYD)

[NorthLight]

Wheee, that was fun! Can I push your button again?!?!

[SailDesign]

Originally Posted by migholetto

O'days are Costa Mesa builds arn't they.

Oh, dear, migho, you've done it again. You could not really be more wrong if you tried (and although you _are_ trying, I don't think you were trying to be this time)
O'Day is/was a Bristol, RHODE Island company. East Coast, that is.

[mighetto]

Originally Posted by SailDesign

Oh, dear, migho, you've done it again. You could not really be more wrong if you tried (and although you _are_ trying, I don't think you were trying to be this time)
O'Day is/was a Bristol, RHODE Island company. East Coast, that is.

Oh lets lighten up. O'Day like many companies on the east coast used designers from all over the world. The O'Day 40 for example was designed by the French designer Phillipe Brand. Roger MacGregor mentions O'day as one of the companies he competed against that is no more in his Mac26x literature. I think by the photo I posted that it is evident that the Mac26x and also the MacGregor 65 have French styling. The French like that wrap around window look that some think is power boat styling in their sailing machines. I am encouraged today to see Crank Boy (AKA Tripp Gal's lacky) in the fish bowl.

http://www.sailinganarchy.com/forums...howtopic=23508

But I remain a man in black owing to a recent poll that found that 80 percent of the Republicans think Bush did a good job with Katrina. Argh. I bless my wife for converting me to a Democrate years ago. Perhaps they do not read the Wall Street Journel, Times or Newsweek. Its that close minded robot mentality out of Connecticut. We are either the stupidest nation on the planet or the most evil. Sigh, there is so much work to do. Lets think happier thoughts of sailing design.

Rhode Island may not be an Island and it may no longer be the sailing state (O'Day is no more) but at least it is a blue state. Well I am off to vote the primary. I have a little man - a runte actually - running for Seattle mayor who I favor. In a perfect world he would have a chance of actually getting some press and getting serious consideration as a candidate. Back to sailing.

There is no other transportation related industry that uses designers not employed by the builder other than the sailboat industry. Irwin and MacGregor fight that way of doing business and are correct in doing so. Do you really disagree? Once the designer stops his/her personal involvement in the build, the builder cuts corners and the boat becomes different. This is why no one wants - or should want - a Melges with a hull number over 100. The well built sail boats, the ones truly worthy, are designed and built by the same person. Of course it can be argued otherwise. I am open to being convinced otherwise in any case.

[FAST FRED]

"Its that close minded robot mentality out of Connecticut. "

CT is actually (unfortunatly ) a "Blue State" .

The welfare recipiants of Hartford , Bridgeport , New Haven ect. out vote the working classes.

"Vote Early Vote Often" isnt only for electing Kennedys with dead folks in Chicago.

200 years ago , last time they mattered,

the Frogs had a saying,

When your 20 if your not Libreal, you have no heart,

When your 40 if your not conservative, you have no BRAIN!

The folks in CT have great brains ,
but get out voted by those folks that vote for Their Livings!

FAST FRED

[jam007]

Let me go back to the 15 knot (17 MPH) Mac26x

Physics is fun (even if mighettos "physics" can be even funnier) so lets do some physics.

The Mac needs a 50 hp engine to achive 15 knots according to mighetto. That gives a driving force of 5000 N. (This is probably without ballast but lets be friendly.)

To get this force from Mac26x sails you will need a windspeed of around 30 knots using full main and spinnaker on a broad reach (hope I get the english term correct here, the wind abaft the beam).

So here is my suggestion to Mr Mighetto:
Take your boat out in a 30+ knots autumn wind together with some friends in other boats with DV-cameras as witnesses. Hoist the main. Turn downwind. Turn off your engine. Hoist the spinnaker. Steer up slightly to get the apparent wind on your beam and prove your claim. (Do not trust your windvane if you havn´t fixed it since you took your "planing" picture.)
Remember to put it on film for the ejoyment of us all. And please, please, use a lifejacket and a crasch helmet!!

I´m looking forward to the pictures

One more thing Mighetto:
The french did not choose platinum for the standard meter because they liked the shiny expensive look but for it´s physical properies. I won´t try to explain more since explaining physics to you is (judging from the failed attempts from lots of nice people on this forum) like pouring water on a goose.

Good Luck Mighetto

Anders

[Buc]

Bruce Farr, Doug Peterson, Olin Stephens, Bill Tripp, Bruce Nelson, Laurie Davidson and many more will be relieved to know they're not likely to be faced with a product liability suit filed by your widow. But I'd be nervous if my name was Roger Macgregor.

As for getting new sails, you might start by learning to trim the ones you have properly.

[FAST FRED]

"you might start by learning to trim the ones you have properly."

Hardly any mystery to proper sail trim,
a $5.00 set of telltails properly used allows the novice the same trim ability as the "old Salt".

On most cruisers the sails are hardly trimmed constantly as there no dozens of apes as on the "racers".

Cruisers mostly trim trim trim ONLY when in sight of another cruiser.

Then everyone is a "racer" , but at least the purpose built cruiser isnt handycapped by some "racing" rule.

Sail de boat mon!

FAST FRED

[mighetto]

Originally Posted by jam007

Let me go back to the 15 knot (17 MPH) Mac26x

Physics is fun (even if mighettos "physics" can be even funnier) so lets do some physics.

The Mac needs a 50 hp engine to achive 15 knots according to mighetto. That gives a driving force of 5000 N. (This is probably without ballast but lets be friendly.)

To get this force from Mac26x sails you will need a windspeed of around 30 knots using full main and spinnaker on a broad reach (hope I get the english term correct here, the wind abaft the beam).

So here is my suggestion to Mr Mighetto:
Take your boat out in a 30+ knots autumn wind together with some friends in other boats with DV-cameras as witnesses. Hoist the main. Turn downwind. Turn off your engine. Hoist the spinnaker. Steer up slightly to get the apparent wind on your beam and prove your claim. (Do not trust your windvane if you havn´t fixed it since you took your "planing" picture.)
Remember to put it on film for the ejoyment of us all. And please, please, use a lifejacket and a crasch helmet!!

I´m looking forward to the pictures

One more thing Mighetto:
The french did not choose platinum for the standard meter because they liked the shiny expensive look but for it´s physical properies. I won´t try to explain more since explaining physics to you is (judging from the failed attempts from lots of nice people on this forum) like pouring water on a goose.

Good Luck Mighetto

Anders

Its a fact that the manufacture claims the Max 26x boat will do 17 MPH under sail. He also claims that for each 100 lbs carried there is a 1 MPH decrease in speed. The M model is less suseptable to speed decrease. Am I foolish to think that they actually can wake board behind a Melges

http://www.wetasschronicles.com/Melges24Wakeboard.mpg

Regardles of the claims and videos, in the modern age designers have to come to realize that the buying public is starting to expect speed. Displacement only speed doesn't cut it except if the vessel is close to 40 foot. This makes all the new 30 to say 37 displacement only monohull designs turkeys. We can respect and appreciate the 20 year old vessels in that size range but seriously the world needs no more of this size displacement hull sailing vessel. Modern weather reporting allows sailboats that can go over 10 MPH to sail ahead, to the side, or around storms and hurricanes. You have to be a thrill seaker or have a blind weather eye to get into such conditions on a properly designed modern sailboat.

Blame the French for the metric system. You can easially break hull speed in normal wind on the Mac26x. I have had mine to 12 MPH. I have also been in gusts to 45 MPH. These are boats that the manufacturer endorses for heavy weather racing and after a decade and 5000 hulls they have a track record the Melges will never come close to. If you think the video is for real regarding the melges, I am game to give it a try on the Mac26x. What a hoot.

[water rat]

I actually do believe the video of the Melges pulling the wakeboarder. I have witnessed Melges 24's at speed and they were flying along well into the teens. It would not suprise me at all that some good wakeboarder could do this. The start would be the hard part.

Now if you think that the M26x can pull a wake boarder UNDER SAIL, than I would like to see proof of it. I am open to believing it if I can see some evidence. Show us.