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

Discussion in 'Sailboats' started by pkoken, Jan 6, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. skinny boy
    Joined: Jan 2005
    Posts: 51
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Anartica

    skinny boy Junior Member

    Gee, I guess I didn't have to give names. I will be happy to forward an email to the editor to let him know you will be talking to him about slander.

    You were chucked from Sailing Anarchy for your behaviour and according to the rules on here you should be chucked from here also.

    Once again I did not misread your post. There is no such prohibition of chines in PHRF. Show me the proof otherwise once again you are deliberately stating a falsehood.

    You are not a captain. Do not refer to yourself as such.

    Since there is clear evidence to the fact that you were banned, maybe it is time for you to stop the lies. Everything you say is a lie. Not one thing that anyone has called you on has turned out to have any truth to it. As a management consultant you should hope the people who pay you don't ever do any due diligence on you. They will not like the results of a google search.
     
  2. mighetto
    Joined: Nov 2004
    Posts: 689
    Likes: 2, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: -6
    Location: water world

    mighetto New Member

    If the Mac did 17 knots under sail in the real world, it would have a negative PHRF rating, not one in the 200s. Period. Get over it.

    Mine has a PHRF of 240. The cirtificate came in just recently. Here is the rating proplem. Unballasted the boat probably comes in with a PHRF of 130. I say this because of negotiations with my rater. That is rediculous. The rating tools clearly are off. The Mac26x is not a racer. She is a fast cruiser nonetheless. I know it is hard to believe. But I get her in double digits regularly. 17 MPH is well recognized as possible by owners. Check the MacGregor Yacht forums. You need not take my word on this. Others will state similarly.

    The skater analogy you keep using is ludicrous. Yeah, the skater bringing their arms in makes the spin faster. Rotating 90 degrees to make arms (horizontal) analagous to keels (vertical), the Mac should roll over faster. Which is does. Congratulations, you have proven your beloved boat to be prone to spinning over onto its side and throwin everyone in the water.

    You have it backwards. Bringing weight to the centerline will make the boat faster and less stable.

    Obviously you're just a troll posting crazy **** to make people respond to you. If you're under the impression this is not painfully obvious, you should drop it. Of course, you won't, and will ramble on incoherently about it, but that's because you simply won't give up, because you're a sociopath. You lack the normal reaction to 'I am so busted, butt-naked in the snow and everyone knows it' which is to give up, go home, and go find some NEW PEOPLE to try to trick. No, you will keep trying to trick us into thinking you're not merely a troll, and we will continue to watch in wide-eyed wonder as you stand naked all the while insisting you are clothed.

    I think myself the child who sees that the king has no cloths. Those in the circle were trained not to see the obvious. The weaver made out like a bandit. All that invisible cloth. All that lead. It is the exact same thing.

    Like all trolls, you thrive on attention, and die when starved of it. Eventually, we will tire of you, and starve you shall. Until then, I shall refute your points when it occurs to me, and mock you for your nakedness.

    Cheers!


    Eventually you will forget me. Then you will have an idea. You will think it came out of no place; then you will be ready for a revolutionary design, like the Mac26x. Or, you will wonder like the fellow at the boat show on Saturday, why your son views the Mac26x in wonder and auw, even as you complain of the indignity because everyone knows the X is not a real sail boat.

    I do this for fun. I hope to also learn about boat design. Sorry you see me as a troll. There is a long history of me on the net. The boat is still relatively unknown. I never tire of bragging about them. But you can always read the cruising log.
     
  3. mighetto
    Joined: Nov 2004
    Posts: 689
    Likes: 2, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: -6
    Location: water world

    mighetto New Member

    I am currently in Olympia. That should be obvious. I will be in Seattle and at the dentist. Have fun chewing on my stuff and lighten up.
     
  4. mighetto
    Joined: Nov 2004
    Posts: 689
    Likes: 2, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: -6
    Location: water world

    mighetto New Member

    Skinny, just back down a little will you? This is all in fun. You did a fine job with me today.
     
  5. skinny boy
    Joined: Jan 2005
    Posts: 51
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Anartica

    skinny boy Junior Member

    Telling lies on the Internet may be fun to you but it is not useful nor fun for the rest of us that actually care to learn something.

    Maybe it is time for you to step away as you have nothing of substance to offer here.
     
  6. SailDesign
    Joined: Jan 2003
    Posts: 1,964
    Likes: 148, Points: 73, Legacy Rep: 650
    Location: Jamestown, RI, USA

    SailDesign Old Phart! Stay upwind..

    Frankie, Babie.... "Of course you have to be technically correct. The stability curves of a keel boat and of a twin keel boat are going to be different. In fact the water ballasted represented in the Mac26x has BETTER stability curves IMO. But of course I need the manufacturer to help me generate those curves."

    If the Mac26X has a point of vanishing stability of 90 degrees or more, I would be VERY surprised. If you tip it upside down (that's with its centreboard pointing straight up, if it will stay there instead of falling back into its slot) will it turn itself back upright again? If you touch its masthead to the water, will it come back up from that? I would be surprised.
    Almost every fin-keeled racing yacht out there will, with the possible exception of an older style of Swan 50-something which has - you guessed it! - a centreboard instead of a fin keel. PLEASE do yourself a favour and read up a bit on what makes a sailing boat stay upright, which is the same thing that gives it power, and that thing is righting moment. Think of the fin keel, and the ballast in it, as the person on the other end of the seesaw, and yourself as the wind in the sails. If the other person moves close to the pivot (like putting all your ballast inside the boat) then you will hit the ground hard (capsizing), when you are both at the same distance (or have the same moment relative to the pivot), then everything is balanced.
    Just think about it....

    If you do not know what is meant by the word "moment" in this context, then you should not open your mouth about stability until you have proved that you understand the concept. Really.

    Steve
     
  7. frankofile
    Joined: Jan 2005
    Posts: 91
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: So Cal

    frankofile Junior Member

    Frank, let's try to keep our roles here clearly in mind, shall we? YOU are the idiot, I am the bemused observer. If you think you're going to drag me into a point by point discussion, you are sadly mistaken. The ridiculous and stupid things you say are self-evident. And you have been corrected so many times about the wrong things that it's like a broken record.

    Here is a question for you though: During your recent vacation in the Galapagos Islands, how many of the Transpacific capable Mac26X's did you see bobbing around at anchor (skittering like a trimaran...) or cruising among the islands? With 5000 of them afloat, and with the admirable ocean crossing characteristics you rave about, there were surely at least one or two. And don't tell me you didn't look for them.
     
  8. sorenfdk
    Joined: Feb 2002
    Posts: 511
    Likes: 27, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 394
    Location: Denmark

    sorenfdk Yacht Designer

    According to Frank, the Mac doesn't do 17 knots . It does 17 MPH . In this case "MPH" stands for "Meters per hour".
     
  9. pkoken
    Joined: Mar 2003
    Posts: 96
    Likes: 2, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 43
    Location: Cruising Hawaii

    pkoken S/V Samadhi V

    This thread just keeps getting better....
     
  10. skinny boy
    Joined: Jan 2005
    Posts: 51
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Anartica

    skinny boy Junior Member

     
  11. FranksaDork
    Joined: Jan 2005
    Posts: 13
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Olympia, WA

    FranksaDork Junior Member

    That's funny.

    He's never done anything except come in dead last (except one time when a boat in his fleet dropped out). With a gift rating like he thinks he has, he should have done better don't ya think?
     
  12. mistral
    Joined: Jul 2004
    Posts: 154
    Likes: 2, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 22
    Location: Sardinia, Italy

    mistral Senior Member

    to all guys except Mighetto, Please stop posting here. Frankie will cover us with his BS as long as somenone will keep on posting. My advice is not to post anymore and to erase all your previous post; this will make Frank lose interest in plaguing this thread and, i hope, this forum; it's a pain for me to see how many clever people lose their time trying to deal with mighetto's absurd theories and statements; simply he won't listen to you nor to anyone else, so Please stop posting here

    Mistral
     
  13. SailDesign
    Joined: Jan 2003
    Posts: 1,964
    Likes: 148, Points: 73, Legacy Rep: 650
    Location: Jamestown, RI, USA

    SailDesign Old Phart! Stay upwind..

    Frank says: "The notion that the lower the CB the better has to have a limit. At some point lowering the CB is counter productive. "

    I'm going to take that one statement of yours, Frank, and show you how stupid it is.

    The CB of a boat SHOULD be as close to the waterline as it can be. Of course, this is because the CB is the Centre of BUOYANCY, not Gravity. The C_G_ (Centre of Gravity) should be as low as possible, although you can create an excessively stiff boat that way, but it will have beautiful RM curves.
    You see, Frank, you are not paying attention at all, and are using terms and acronyms that you do not understand, to describe conditions that you do not understand.
    One day, someone is actually going to listen to your "put the ballast as high as possible" lines, and (at the least) lose their boat, and I hope they come looking for you with the bggest frikkin' lawyer they can find.

    Over and out.

    Steve
     
  14. mighetto
    Joined: Nov 2004
    Posts: 689
    Likes: 2, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: -6
    Location: water world

    mighetto New Member

    CB? did I say CB? Well good catch Steve. Over. :) Of course I am was chatting about CG. Pardon me for getting hot and bothered yesterday from all of the flame. One day, has come. I am listened to more than I should be. So here is the disclaimer. A sailor will always get his information from more than one source.

    Now we need to discuss more about "stiffness". A boat with a long thin fin with a bulb on the end does appear to be able to have a CG at the same place as the identical boat with a shorter fin but a heavier bulb. I am concluding that the major advantage of the long fin then is the ability of the identical boat to carry less weight. In other words the short fin heavier bulb vessel can have identical stability curves as the long fin less heavier bulb keel.

    I will not allow you to stop me from going further with the analysis because I am so confident that it is correct (which likely means it isn't :) ) I see this so very clearly. There isn't even any fog. Here it goes. I am serious.

    Given one can get the same stability curve on the same hull regardless of fin length just by adding weight to reach the same CG, and given the obvious problems with long fins in regards to touching down and prohibition of use from most all weather harbors, in the absence of an artificial racing design rule, you are better off putting the weight into the hull structure rather than on the fin. At the limit, all the weight can be moved off the fin and put into the hull except in the rare situation where the CG is below the hull.

    Now the question is. Does having the CG below the hull provide any speed advantage?

    I can not open the Church today owing to pressing business. Furthermore, we have determined that it is best for me to limit postings to a few per week. The aggrivation is to much for this old man and youngsters just can't handle the truth. So please someone else take the ball and run with it. The implications are so huge for design with the above clarity. For example why not put an engine as part of the hull structure and eliminate weight from the fin to get the same stability curves. Or why bother with a canter, why not just a retractable. Or why even have a weighted fin at all, why not a centerboard.

    The above is so profound that it is like the uniform theory of boat design. String theory. It explains the rational for lighter and lighter deck structures, why Cal 40s with their thicker than needed hulls perform so well, an why some boats do not benefit from lighter rigging. Stability really is everthing and the above explains it. What is wanted by a sailor is to use a (egad) Jim Taylor term, is Variable Stability. Only I doubt he sees that as I do. To me it means you want less stability in under 7 MPH winds (sorry folks this is how it is reported - not knots) In over 7 MPH you want more. The way you get it, regardless of design is via weight. More crew, more gear, more water ballast or weight distribution, more weighted fin length with same weight on fin, or less weight aloft - ie less sail.

    Sincerely Frank.
     

  15. mighetto
    Joined: Nov 2004
    Posts: 689
    Likes: 2, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: -6
    Location: water world

    mighetto New Member

    The stability curves of a keel boat and of a twin keel boat are going to be different. In fact the water ballast represented in the Mac26x has BETTER stability curves IMO. But of course I need the manufacturer to help me generate those curves.

    Steve.

    Of course you have to be technically correct. If the Mac26X has a point of vanishing stability of 90 degrees or more, I would be VERY surprised.

    She does. Roger MacGregor is on record with Practical Sailor as stating that the boat has 115 stability. But what does that mean on a centerboarder? What does it mean on any boat really. Once you add crew and gear you change the vanishing stability. You can make it better or worse.

    If you tip it upside down (that's with its centreboard pointing straight up, if it will stay there instead of falling back into its slot) will it turn itself back upright again?

    This test was required prior to allowing export of the Mac26x to Europe. The story I have been told, but can not confirm because I wasn't there, was that the testers would not allow the boat to be turned directly upside down with the water ballast full. MacGregor Yachts, desired to pass this test, and had anticipated that it would be allowed to fill the water ballast for the testing. The MacGregor Yachts legals were sharping their pens for action when Roger said: "well test her dry". She righted herself unassisted.

    If you touch its masthead to the water, will it come back up from that? I would be surprised.

    Watch the video or read the brochure. The vessel comes right back, ballasted or unballasted. In fact we are forgoing divers for bottom work, prior to racing now, and draw down the boat to her side for bottom scrubbing. This was recommended in the owners manual. The only trick is to use the jib and not main haulyard. However, I do carry an extra 300 lbs of gear stowed low in the boat. The M has 300 lbs of solid ballast and it made sense to me.

    Almost every fin-keeled racing yacht out there will, with the possible exception of an older style of Swan 50-something which has - you guessed it! - a centreboard instead of a fin keel. PLEASE do yourself a favour and read up a bit on what makes a sailing boat stay upright, which is the same thing that gives it power, and that thing is righting moment. Think of the fin keel, and the ballast in it, as the person on the other end of the seesaw, and yourself as the wind in the sails. If the other person moves close to the pivot (like putting all your ballast inside the boat) then you will hit the ground hard (capsizing), when you are both at the same distance (or have the same moment relative to the pivot), then everything is balanced.
    Just think about it....


    I think mostly about what makes any boat stay upright. The notion of a fixed fin in the water stopped making sense to me when I learned that the canters do not get lateral resistance from the keel fin. They rely on forward rudders instead.

    If you do not know what is meant by the word "moment" in this context, then you should not open your mouth about stability until you have proved that you understand the concept. Really.

    Steve


    I know that all boats can capsize in sufficient sea, regardless of righting moment. I also know that lubbers added several tons of led pellets to perfectly well designed sailboats because they didn't like the feel of the sea. I also know that a "tender" boat is made less so by reducing sail and that roller furling is the greatest sailing invention of the modern age. Steve, it doesn't take lessons of "moment" to ride a bike. Neither does it take such lessons for sailing. Are you really saying otherwise? I suspect the undersanding of "moment" is something every human has since learning to walk. That doesn't mean we are able to articulate it. But I will try later. I do appreciate the comments.
     
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.