TP52s

[mighetto]

Chris T 249

Yes, when you look at any natural thing in the sea or sky, you do not find weighted bulbs on the end of a thin foil. You also don't find fibreglass on a duck.

You do know that both ducks and fiberglass are organics. Of course fiberglass designs originally followed what had been done in wood, another organic. The fact that the material is about as strong as aluminum and does not turn to mush like wood over time is just wonderful. When manufacturers put wood layers into fibergass designs, like is often done with balsa, judgements need to be rendered. It is best to call what looks like a duck a duck. What looks like an obsoleted design obsolete. The TP52 looks obsolete.

You don't find an internal combustion engines on a penguin's bum.

No but they are found - even required - on TP52s. Some would say that because of the required internal engine, a TP52 isn't a real sailboat. The purists do not consider anything not rendered in wood pure sailboat. Lets face the facts. For a sailboat over 35 foot or so to be marketed succesfully, that boat must also be a good powerboat.

You don't find a propeller or jet turbine on a swift.

No but you do see that vortex thing in a water tunnel. Yes water tunnel. Before the expense of a wind tunnel, water tunnels have long been used in aircraft design. It is no wonder to me that Frank Bethwaite, a profesional in the airplane field, could become an amature boat designer, then hobbiest designer and indeed founder of the modern sailing style.

You don't find radar on a whale.

Sonar then.

You don't find blankets, stoves, c cabins, flourescent lights, radios, centreboards, roller furling, wheels or trailers in nature either.

You do find these murrelets. The marbled murrelet is a small seabird which nests in the coastal, old-growth forests of the Pacific Northwest. They spend most of their time at sea but when it is time for comfort and nesting, look to the forests for that. I do think boats should be more Spartan. The notion in the design should be to get there fast to find comfort ashore - like a murrelet.

So if you can't have a bulb keel because "it just ain't natural", you also can't have your Mac, your car, your house, your clothes, your TV, or your computer either.

You should not have a bulb keel because it is weight that can make your boat sink if capsized. It also will snag crab pots, get lodged in reefs, damage reefs and over time that weight will crack the hull. You do not even need weather. Just wakes. A long bulb fin means you have fewer all weather harbors to duck into and you have to anchor outside of some protected waters, like atols, where your boat gets more exposure to the elements and hence requires more maintenance. This is all well known. What has not been proven is a single benefit.

Please, don't take that as meaning you have to take your clothes off. Just get rid of your computer.

Are you referring to my upcoming trip to the Galapagos Islands. In the 1930s one of the islands was renamed Eden and a nudest group took it over. I do not see Eden on my chart, sigh. No computers will be taken to the Islands. So you will have some mighetto free time in about a month. Hang in there.

[mighetto]

"They could gain stability by using carbon fiber on the top portion of the mast"

Stop, Please STOP, STOP NOW - you freak TP52's are carbon rigged, the whole rig. Your lack of knowledge about sailing is only surpassed by your ignorance about yacht, rig, and foil design.

Let me rephrase "They could gain stability by using a lighter carbon fiber portion on the top portion of the mast, like the Tasars"



You can make the mast out of anything but it still has to be weighty. Why is that? It is freaky like the bulb keel unless there is some reason.

I think the bulb keel is required in the design so that owner drivers can pretend they are racing AC boats. Only after 2007, I suspect those bulbs will be either greatly reduced in size or completely eliminated. The experiment in that foil shape is over.

With ever comment you type your ignorance seems to grow ....


"Let me rephrase "They could gain stability by using a lighter carbon fiber portion on the top portion of the mast, like the Tasars"

The absurdity of comparing a Tasar to a TP52 aside - a dingy rig is not intended to carry the weights and stresses that a TP52 rigs is in Kites and MH Genoas. The top of a TP52 rig is un-jumpered and is allowed to flex and bend as is require to maintain the appropriate shape (to promote speed) and still can handle both MH Genoa and a 0 kite at tight angles. The rig is fairly light considering it's use .....

"I think the bulb keel is required in the design so that owner drivers can pretend they are racing AC boats. Only after 2007, I suspect those bulbs will be either greatly reduced in size or completely eliminated. The experiment in that foil shape is over."

You really have no clue - a TP52 has very little in common with an IACC yacht. My friend may I suggest a sailing school for you, it would help remove some of these silly misconception some fool has put into your head. J world runs several fine schools nation wide. Comparing a modern yacht to a 1974 (5) trainer dingy may be the silliest thing I have ever seen.

Originally Posted by CT 249

Frank you dork, it's already been pointed out to you that the Tasar does NOT have a carbon topmast. Never has. Perhaps never will.

PS Guest; the Tasar was never designed as a "trainer dinghy". It was developed from a racing development class to be a one design racer. The recent world champs include Olympic 49er, FD and 470 medallists. There's no "trainer" about it.

I'm deleting my other posts, but I couldn't let this one go by.

My bad - they always looked a bit to much like JY15's I guess
"TASAR is an acronym for `Totally And Simply All-round Racing'. The Tasar carries two crew, though it is possible to sail her single-handed in light to moderate breezes. By design, the Tasar does not carry a trapeze or spinnaker. Nonetheless the Tasar offers creditable performance when compared to other two-person dinghies.

The Tasar is a strictly controlled one-design class that is sailed all round the world, but particularly in Australia, North America, Japan and the UK."

Guess I still like skiffs to much .......

[mighetto]

I'll be sailing for the whole week-end in a awesome 20-25 knot breeze with flat seas in a beutiful place called Angel's Gulf, i hope you'll do the same....anywhere else.....

fair wind
Mistral


Say hello to my brother Mark. Got to get to Italy some time before the 2007 AC in Spain. Hope to have it all figured out by then. If you spot a TP52 be certain to check it out. They can not be as bad as I have taken them to be.

[CT 249]

Originally Posted by Guest

My bad - they always looked a bit to much like JY15's I guess
"TASAR is an acronym for `Totally And Simply All-round Racing'. The Tasar carries two crew, though it is possible to sail her single-handed in light to moderate breezes. By design, the Tasar does not carry a trapeze or spinnaker. Nonetheless the Tasar offers creditable performance when compared to other two-person dinghies.

The Tasar is a strictly controlled one-design class that is sailed all round the world, but particularly in Australia, North America, Japan and the UK."

Guess I still like skiffs to much .......

Ouch, comparing the JY15 to the Tasar hurts (although I shouldn't knock the JY). The Tasar has a 68kg hull, the JY15 is something like 125kg. One has a wing mast with fully battened main, the other a standard mast and soft sail. One has chines, the other doesn't.

But hell yeah, the Tasar is not in any way a skiff, even if we can beat the slower (badly sailed) 16 foot skiffs upwind, as well as the world's best 470s and Contenders at times. There's still no faster jib-and-main OD dinghy. Still, the Tasar hull shape has been left behind by developments in skiffs and in the NS14 class from which it was developed. It's only Mighetto who still thinks the Tasar is a leading-edge hull, but from talking to Frank and Julian Bethwaite and reading Frank demonstrates there was a fairly clear development line from the "Medium Dribbly" to the Tasar to the two-handed Bethwaite 18s, to the B14, to the Bethwaite B18 18' skiffs. It's getting to be a pretty thin link, though!

[mighetto]

CT 249

Now, now, now. I do not consider Tasars leading edge technology. Neither does Bethwaite design. I do think they would make good equipment for an Olympics co-ed event. Hey check this out:

- Editor H2ONotes [ 12/16/2004 - 06:24 ] #

To the delight and relief of some, and the consternation of others, IRC will be finally taking root in the USA for 2005. The recent official confirmation of its adoption by the New York YC and the Storm Trysail Club brings validation from two of the most active and venerable institutions in the game, while on the west coast the St Francis YC's Rolex Big Boat Series offered the rule an opportunity for a high-profile inshore debut last fall.

The above is the kind of thing that makes me think our discussions here have impact. I mean really this is old old news, but the word just hasn't been getting out fast enough. The only thing missing from the anouncement is how it may be the end of ORCA and the TP52s. Well perhaps thats the "to the consternation of others" part. US Sailing had be be dragged into supporting IRC. If now they can just let go of ORCA. Why endorse that organization when it covers today only 11 boats and the additional 10 that might get built in 2005 are not even US vessels? I still do not think any are CE marked, though that was reported to be the case. Has anyone boarded one of these obsoleted designs and seen a CE marking? Do I have to do that research? It is good to see the mighetto avitar flying again. Isn't it?

[K4s]

Soren,
Please accept the medal,no reply on or off the subject for 2 days,bloody marvelous what a bit of sound reasoning can do.Again well done!
K4s

[mighetto]

Mistral Bond, Søren Flening, Rubbish Readers everywhere,

Seasons Greatings. So much to blabber on about today. But I see I have been given some homework, both on and off list. So stay tuned. In the mean time Let it Snow!

[mighetto]

Originally Posted by sorenfdk

Thanks.
Hopefully, the silence is due to Franks reading up on the basics of yacht design - he surely needs to!

Silent Night Holly Night. Tis the Season You know. I do want to encourage folks to post more here. The TP52s are probably the greatest model of boat design absurdatity in several decades. But out side of design they also represent a misuse of Interenet technology, a polution of this relatively new medium that has spawned paid-for-content URLS like apparently Sailing Anarchy.

That site could well have been started specifically to introduce, support and hype this poor-for-ocean-use sailing machine. (SA is only 3 years old. They have not yet demonstrated that they are worthy of serious discussion regarding sailboat design.)

When a professional designer like Robert Perry publishes measurements for a TP52 vessel which screens it out for ocean crossing work but we in our legally expected role as captains are not allowed to judge these measurements publically, there is cause for concern.

I can fully understand why a professional designer would need to be respectfull of poor designs publically. But I see no ligitimate reason what-so-ever why captains and prospective captains, who engage in boat design debates as we have for hundreds of years should be silenced with threat of legal action or action through our clubs. In fact these threats are the definition of unsportsman like behaviour. (Unsportsman as is defined in the rules for racing which I recommend my fans read up on because there are sever penulties.)

By SNAME and even US Sailing ratios, there is misuse of the Internet when ever a TP52 is refered to as a TransPacific 52. Only some TP52s are worthy of Trans Pacific work and AFAIK, those are only the newest Farr versions. My Mac26x is more TransPacific than probably most of the TP52s. She wins the game on math. Math can prove something. No race ever will because there will always be the retort involving luck. I am suggesting that TP stand instead for TransPortable. Lets not only read up on the basics of yacht design, but also on forum thread writing. The following is a very good URL Let it guide us.

http://www.alistapart.com/articles/writeliving

Let me summarize. First relax, we are only pissing off 11 TP52 owners and a few designers and advertisors who will love us again just as soon as money is discussed. Second, good friends are not nearly as important as a good enemy like perhaps me. In other words 1000 yes men are not as valuable as the one who says no. Third, stand up and speak out! If you can articulate an advantage to a fixed fin bulb weighted foil that goes beyond some arbitrary and GP RWP rejected stability ratio then we should hear about it. Forth, use the archives and recognize that right now - at this time - forums like this one are overly represented by those with legal training. These folks are paralyzed by the notion that any one can get the information they need from the Internet without legal representation. On the west coast you do not need a lawyer to purchase real estate or boats. On the east, you currently need legal representation to purchase real estate and perhaps in the future boats, autos, a meal at fancy restaurant, and of course any time you speak out you will need legal representation.

Lets just be real clear. Captains historically have been legally responsible for judging the seaworthiness of craft. Not designers, not manufactures, not the government, and not the dealers. Designers, manufacturers, governments, and dealers are responsible for educating captains so they can judge. I am getting off of my stool now. Lets have fun.

[mighetto]

Mistral Bond

Ok lets try this rubbish out. This is what I have come to believe a hollow is.

Take a spoon. Dangle it from the handle into the stream running out of a faucet. If you dangle the spoon so the shape presented to the stream is displacement hull like it will do what your intuition tells you is incorrect. Rather than being pushed out of the stream, the spoon will be sucked in.

Turn the spoon to the other side and you get:



The above is a vessel used now by the tribes of the Pacific Northwest. It is very stable in the ocean and yet very shallow draft. It is also very fast, 40 knots plus. The above is the fishery enforcement vessel.

Americas Cup rules prohibit hollows. This I understand is what prevents multihulls from competing because the space between the hulls is a big hollow. The effect of the hollow, is like that of the spoon. It lifts the hull from the water at speed.

[mighetto]

Originally Posted by Guest

With ever comment you type your ignorance seems to grow ....


"Let me rephrase "They could gain stability by using a lighter carbon fiber portion on the top portion of the mast, like the Tasars"

The absurdity of comparing a Tasar to a TP52 aside - a dingy rig is not intended to carry the weights and stresses that a TP52 rigs is in Kites and MH Genoas. The top of a TP52 rig is un-jumpered and is allowed to flex and bend as is require to maintain the appropriate shape (to promote speed) and still can handle both MH Genoa and a 0 kite at tight angles. The rig is fairly light considering it's use .....

"I think the bulb keel is required in the design so that owner drivers can pretend they are racing AC boats. Only after 2007, I suspect those bulbs will be either greatly reduced in size or completely eliminated. The experiment in that foil shape is over."

You really have no clue - a TP52 has very little in common with an IACC yacht. My friend may I suggest a sailing school for you, it would help remove some of these silly misconception some fool has put into your head. J world runs several fine schools nation wide. Comparing a modern yacht to a 1974 (5) trainer dingy may be the silliest thing I have ever seen.

Interesting post and a well thought out one. The TP52s are fractional rigs that fly the spinnaker from the top of the mast. That portion of the mast may not be well supported. On the Tasars, crews snap that top part of the mast, from time to time. This is no big deal for these ocean dinghies because in fact the topmost part of the mast is removable. So a break in that portion is repaired by mounting the spare.

The TP52s (at least some of them) also have spreaders that are angled back. What I know from discussions about my ride is that many ocean sailors consider fractionals and angled back spreaders of concern. Apparently, there were a few dismastings on boats with this kind of rig when the vessels were flying a single head sail, down wind. So even today, mast head rigs are said to be better for ocean crossing work.

This puts into question why TP52s fly so much sail starting from the top of the mast. On my boat, the manufacturer intended the spinnaker to be flown no higher than the headstay attachment point. Folks of course do break that intent. If the top of a TP52 rig is un-jumpered and is allowed to flex and bend as is require to maintain the appropriate shape (to promote speed), then it also is at risk of being snapped off like a Tasar mast.

These concerns were believed valid for Mac26x cruisers even though there has never been a rig failure. Rail Meat spent considerable time fumbling with a photo to show rig failure in a Macgregor Yacht but it was clear that the mast had been dropped and had not failed. Rail Meat, do say hi. Is rig failure of concern for the TP52s or by nature of the high cost of these vessels (close to a million dollars) can that be ignored? I suppose you know eventually there will be a failure. But perhaps not. Perhaps technology has advanced to the point where this traditional concern is no longer valid. But you still find many of the minitrasat captains prefer aluminum rather than composits for the mast because if the mast should give way during an ocean crossing you can jury rig an aluminum mast from the broken parts. That is likely not possible for material that shatters (like glass) when it does give way.


Be aware that TP52s have that required bulb keel in common with an IACC yacht. In fact that bulb keel is the feature that is expected to sell the yacht because under IMC the TP52s are rated poorly. A TP52 is correctly described as an IMC yacht and lets face the fact. IMC is obsolete in the US.

Here is what I advise on sailing schools. Avoid all US Sailing acredited Keel Boat Schools. These have been poluted by Jim Teeters top down approach which disparages worthy modern designs like the movable ballast designs and fast designs like ULDBs. Instead find schools that have rejected US Sailing developed materials and use Frank Bethwaites High Performance Sailing book. When my wife and I first started to sail we took Red Cross accredited courses. We sailed on open 18 footers (Omegas) on the ocean (Santa Barbara) and thought nothing of it. Today's US Sailing accredited schools do real harm to students because they teach them to fear coastal ocean sailing and ocean crossing when it really is no more dangerous than freeway driving. That training encourages the purchase of larger and larger, but not more seaworthy, boats like TP52s.

[mighetto]

the same old game Frank, poor knowledge and even poorer examples, i'll give one more advice;

Not a game. This is why the legal trained have so much trouble with Internet forums. They make up stories and wait for some one to call them on this. That is the legal game. In court what really happened will never be known because both sides make up stories that they hope facts will support. This is why design by court case is so troubling. Yet that is what we have in the US. On an Internet Forum, posting anything you believe false is totally inappropriate. Lets not do that here. We are not anarchy.

take a good boat design and study, i mean nail your ass to your seat for a couple of weeks, at least, and then we can talk about planing hulls; i'm currently working on a planing hull for a fisherman-cruise motorboat, 27-footer, 160-210 hp engine, up to 30 knots, deep v hull, wooden epoxy building, all elemesnts CAD designed; so don't come here to bother us pretending to explain us how boat plans; as soon as you'll be able to write down a complete sequence of savitsky's equation for a given hull (at least this...) we'll keep on talking about planing hull; i'm a young designer, kinda beginner in this work, and i squeezed my brain upon books (not awesome web pages full of funny jokes, BUT BOOKS, know what i mean???) for a long couple of years to begin (just begin) to understand boat's behaviour, and now i'm very conservative in taking any sharp opinion on other's people boats and projects.

As long as the books have included power, you could be on track. What we have in the US is a situation where the power boat designers are excluded from designing sailboats. There is a legal reason for this. It is the Bayliner 180 case we discussed here. I have many books on sailboat design but I consider those written from 1950 to say 1970 to be suspect and likely in error.

I forgot to say that books are nothing if you don't spend enough time on the sea trying to link the teory with the world of reality, that strange kinda world that you seem to ignore;

With this kind of logic a medical doctor would have to have had cancer to treat cancer. I do not need to sail a gale to know that I would not want to be in one on any pleasure craft boat. With modern reporting, I have to seek such a condition. Those who seek this condition, so they might be considered worthy by you of chatting about it, are just by seeking the condition, crazy and unworthy of chatting with.

this will be my last post in this thread, so i take some more lines to explain better; i don't like very much TP52 as i don't love particularly IMS, but i've seen them on the sea (IMS rolex maxi CUp, IMS world Champion, swan CUP, FARR40 thropy and so on) for some hours, and they're absolutely good sane boats, a state-of-the-art compromise between seaworthiness and speed, they have impressive accelerations and pointing ability because they're designed by the better design team in the world, same design teams which develope Volvo ocean race 70' or IMOCA 60' ; they represent the actual edge of yacht design in their respective field, no matter what you can think, it has always been like this and always will be; Nat Herreshof, Fife, Olin Stpehens, Laurent Giles, and the other "gods" of yacht design raced years ago with their boats and concepts in similar races and won, that's all, that's the sport of sailing, you may like it or not, but please don't bother us anymore with fishing vessels, motor boat, false sailboat like Mac26, or simply don't dare to write about thing that you totally ignore;

You honor none of the listed designers by that behavior. Reconsider. I have much to say about Laurent Giles. Did you know he proposed a twin keel for Trekka and thought a 26 footer more than worthy for ocean work - including world circumnavigation? This was pre fiberglass. Of course a comment like a false sailboat requires much discussion. Roger MacGregor introduced the Mac26x sailboat after being considered for the Sailboat Hall of Fame, which he is now honored in. It was on the strength of reputation that he could dare such a radical design. Much can be learned from it and of course there will be better but if you ignore this vessel you ignore mini-transates and you ignore all movable ballasted machines. You ignore the future of yacht design. If you ignore TP 52s you ignore the past failed experimental period involving fixed bulb keels. Your planing V hull will not have a bulb keel will it? Why not?

if you think that your Mac 26 is more seaworthy than a TP52 this is a your problem, not a Farr's one, you will never prove it simply 'cause you'll never do a transpac on your boat!!! anyway it won't be a proof, sailors have done transatlantic races in every kind of floating things in the last century, including a hobie 18 sport beach cat...single handed; they have the right to express their opinion on what's a seaworthy boat, not you, you didn't gain this right, nor do i.

If you are the captain of a boat, you have a legal responsibility to develop an opinion on what is a seaworthy boat. Your statement about floating things is a good one because a seaworthy boat is a function of crew. Your argument about the Mac26x and TP52 is an argument with SNAME and US Sailing. Farr very obviously has corrected its recent flavor of TP52 to the capsize risk ratio. If that correction translates into slower speed there has not been a compromize but still an improvement as long as the boats are marketed as TransPacific. If the boats are marketed as TransPortable.... Thats all I am saying. I couldn't sit still long enough to cross the US on a motorbike, what would make me think crossing an ocean is fun? It isn't. I know this and I think most folks know this.

no matter how much index or odd mathemathical calculations o r weird absurd esamples you'll take us to prove it, you simply don't have the right to express such opininons, this right comes from experience, a thing which you have none.

best regards
Mistral

I am presumed to have sailed around Vancouver Island. The largest waves in the world hit the wild side of this Island. I claim the right. Now post Mistral, you are worthy and I want to be educated.

You are presumed to have sailed around Vancouver Island? You have never made the passage form the north end to the south end on the west side. Without having done that you can't presume to have done anything.

because you have ADD and don't want to sail doesn't mean others don't. There are those of us who are members of the ironbutts club also, which have made the trip across the country and back more than once on a motrocycle. Because you are not capable doesn't make it any less fun for others. Because you are not capable or do not have the courage to face the sea or the open highway doesn't make it any less of something. It means you are simple a powerboater and an SUV driver. It means you have no courage or personal motivation to push yourself to be better. It means you have no rights to claim about anything.

Shut up and go away. You weary us with your drivel and cheapen this board. I have stayed out of this thread until now but your claims of right because you motored for 4 hours near Cape Scott as having been offshore is humiliating to you and insulting to the others who actaully went around the island unlike you.

Originally Posted by mighetto

I am presumed to have sailed around Vancouver Island. The largest waves in the world hit the wild side of this Island. I claim the right. Now post Mistral, you are worthy and I want to be educated.

Now Frank, you wouldn't want to give the readers here the wrong idea. You have motored and/or sailed in the waters surrounding Vancouver Island. You have not circumnavigated Vancouver Island in your Mac26.