TP52s

[DGreenwood]

Steve
You are correct...lets go one thing at a time. It is the only way to deal with this guy.
OK Frank
I'll start with the word "argument". This is apparently what you think you are doing. The word "argument" implies some corporeal point over which to have either an exchange of opinions or a pleading of ones own point of view, sometimes in heated terms but with some tangible idea to discuss.There is no such discernable point in anything you say. I'm not kidding here Frank...stop rocking forward and back in your chair and concentrate.
Try this: design a point of debate based on something you know about and is within the purview of your experience.
Like for example: Psychotropic drugs do help to stabalize thought processes long enough to take in a complete idea.

Think about this a while and I will debate it with you.

[mighetto]

Greenwood.

I don't think this is a debate forum. Debates allow you to state things that you know are false. If the opponent isn't smart enough to catch you on the falsehood you score points. We should agree that on boatdesign.net only what is believed should be posted. For example I believe that you have more control over this venue than you should have. Your posts have been on 52 for sometime now and only flipped to 53 just now. Perhaps a comment on that from you is in order.

Anyway, I wish to alert folks that ICON is up for sale. The advertisment appears in NW Yachting December 2004 on page 52. (no page 51). This design is no compromise. See the articles

http://www.iconsailing.com/html/articles.html

The vessel has the "sexy" bulb keel but it is a hydraulically controlled retractable, otherwize known as a centerboarder. The vessel has at least two bulbs for different race day conditions and the boat is likely transportable. Nomex is used as the core material in the hull. There are photos at http://www.iconsailing.com/html/__construction.html.

Note especially the Keel Machining and Keel Drop in. This boat showed well in the Sidney Hobart. Taking 2nd place in her division. She is a 65 footer.

The owner's wife wanted to modify the boat so it was not so open to the sea. This will spoil her racability IMO so I am glad some lottery winner or A lister is being given the chance to purchase her. But I doubt there is much negotiation room on price. I believe Robert Perry's shop did some preliminary drawings for modifications to gain spousal approval. If the price isn't right the owner is likely to just implement the modifications.

Might TP52s be modified to become hydraulically controled retractables along the lines of Icon and Mirrabella V? Why would owners object to that? There has been a huge compromize in the cruisibility of these 11 TP52 vessels in order to make them good buoy racers and that compromise is mostly the long fixed fin bulb keel. With technology does one really have to compromise anymore? Lets note that retractables are a form of movable ballasted machines. Perry Design probably came up with the first no-compromise racer cruiser in the world.

MacGregor Yachts came up with the first nocompromise cruiser racer. That would be the Mac26x

I will also note that Perry has drawn out a very French, and MacGregor 65 looking (IE Mac26x looking) wrap around pilot house racer cruiser. If Icon gets purchased perhaps that will be the upgrade for the current owner. The best design is the design your spouse will sail with you on.

Oh Bezzerk is now in print. This is the 27 foot fiberglass boat that sailed the Antartic. I remember a report that her portlights got blasted out, but other than that she showed better than Shackleton did on his explorations. Looking forward to reading that one.

So the movie "wind" was a documentary. I thought it was a comedy.

Why don't you put a wumper (spelling) on the mac.


I suppose the Lione king is a documentary also. Gotta love those singing animals!

[Skippy]

"Cap'n Ron" was a documentary. Good buddya mine. Great guy.

[mighetto]

TP 52 Defender

I see the ***** is still running at the mouth - Remember boys and girls that this individual has never even seen a TP52, Never participated in an Ocean Race, and is unable to under stand the simplest points of righting moment (be they keel, water, or CBTF).

I do have problems with simplest points of righting moment. So would any jury. This is because you have to believe in what you were taught at US Sailing to buy into the notion that a boat that can sink after capsize is better than one that can not.

Let me tell you what I believe. Then Greenwood or you can say what is wrong with my notions. I think water ballasted monohulls provide the greatest righting moment possibility. The next would be the twin keel vessels of which I think several water ballasted vessels might qualify - especialy if they have dual rudders. Then would be wide boats as are used for CBTF, a patented canting rudder mechanism. I think fixed fins a huge compromize just like all power boaters do. This is because they can be used as a lever by a wave to flip a boat over. The retracting fins are superior because you can reduce the size of the lever. I think canters stupid. They are popular today because a patant could be obtained and hence the career of Farrier might be followed by the engineer. They are stupid because Murphy will win out and they will be cocked in the wrong way at the wrong time and possibly locked that way and because the weight of the keel will send them to a natural state on the bottom of the sea when the boat is swamped.

Francis - your hack ideas are still serving to make you look like an idiot please stop.

I have to in about a week. Not giving up a cruising opportunity of a life time for Internet banter. Sorry.

As to your other questions - What do you mean by a trophy kid? I have several trophies from sailing events including 2 national championships if that is what you are asking.

This is a generational thing. Us F-ers (50+ year olds) have come to distrust crew that are under 25 or 30. Part of the reason for that is that their parents have raised them to think they should get a trophy in every thing they do. This translates into missing winch handles, GPS units, etc, IE trophies. Usually the trophies are perpetual. In otherwords they mysteriously return to the race boat over time. But there are other problems. Trophy kids expect their captains to cart them around like their parents did to socker practice. They don't expect to have to pay to join clubs but instead expect their captains to pay for them like their parents would do. I am focusing on the negatives. There isn't a winlee around that will not put up with a Trophy kid. The other term used is Echo Boomer. I don't see much captain potential in them. Hopefully I have this wrong. They make good meat. Rail meat.

As to golf - I have played the game but not since the 80's, never enjoyed it that much (the closest thing I do to golf might be sporting clays).

I was recruited to a golf club just the other day. The notion of an all-weather golfer had never occured to me. But Scotland has lousy weather. Golf clubs actively recruit sailors. This bothers me because folks can and do sail competitively into their 80s. The argument always is that sailing is boring. I can see that on windward leeward buoy courses. It is not a bad arguement. But golf clubs are also suffering declining membership. I have not figured it all out other than to say we do not chat golf on Murrelet (or horses but that is a different story). It is considered as unlucky as a bannana.

As to my defense of the TP52 class - I have used facts and personal experience to support my case, so far you have lied, plagiarized, miss directed, and general talked about things you know nothing about.

So unfair. You need to come up with specifics. I do none of that. I think the word is slander. Who is telling you to say things like that? Trophy kids often will spout off what they are told to by parent substitutes and parents without thinking things through. They are poor decision makers owing to this and make conclusions that are in error. Can there be a future for the US given that 80 million are this way? I haven't given up.

Front up with your pocket cruiser in the Ft. Lauderdale race and show us all how you and your motor boat are faster and technologically superior to the TP52's.

Keep your eyes open. You probably will spot a Mac26x. The boat has superior ratios for ocean use. This should not be debated. The notion that the X will motor faster than a TP52 should also not be debated. The fact that a movable ballasted cruiser racer is comparable to a fixed fin racer cruiser should be debated. The notion that both the Mac26x and TP52 should race the same PHRF races and TransPac races should be debated. The notion that the Mac26x is an uncompromised sailboat but that the TP52s have compromised seaworthiness for a failed experimental but somehow sexy testicle keel should be debated.

Till your resume even equals 1/2 of that of other here you still need to keep your head down and ass up (and your ears open!).

Oh I fathom my sailing resume exceeds those of some. But in anycase my point is that in times of technology change, anyone claiming to have more than five years of relevant experience is beyond help. They are lost. I have experience with a movable ballast vessel. More experiance than most here. This is the relevant experience in judging a design because it is the future of yacht design.

head down and ass up? what is with that? Is this what they teach you at US Sailing? See the films discussed today and Master and Commander. We are all vulnerable in our rears. If you had spent any time in San Francisco you would know that. Drop your keys on Polk Street and you are best off kicking them all the way back to your vessel. This is information you can use. Be thankful I have provided it.

Huzzah Huzzah

[DGreenwood]

Frank
Still your your fingers write but nary a word is fathomable. Translated; You haven't got a clue what you are talking about...but the really scary part is you don't care.
I think you made some sort of attempt at insulting me but it is unclear.

For your edification, it is the third definition of the word debate that is the formal sense; as in a contest. The first, is to deliberate or consider something. The second is to engage in a discussion or argument. No matter, you are incapable of any of the above.

As to my entry count staying on 52...one of the contraindications of psychotropic treatment is petite mal seizures and the patient experiencing rapid recurring yet disconected events. So now we come to the pharmacists age old question...do we up the meds, cure the malady and suffer the side effects or drop them and live with a ******* lunatic? What's it going to be Frank

[mighetto]

Originally Posted by DGreenwood

Frank
Still your your fingers write but nary a word is fathomable. Translated; You haven't got a clue what you are talking about...but the really scary part is you don't care.
I think you made some sort of attempt at insulting me but it is unclear.

For your edification, it is the third definition of the word debate that is the formal sense; as in a contest. The first, is to deliberate or consider something. The second is to engage in a discussion or argument. No matter, you are incapable of any of the above.

As to my entry count staying on 52...one of the contraindications of psychotropic treatment is petite mal seizures and the patient experiencing rapid recurring yet disconected events. So now we come to the pharmacists age old question...do we up the meds, cure the malady and suffer the side effects or drop them and live with a ******* lunatic? What's it going to be Frank

I am going Berserk. Well I am going to get the book Berserk. Power boaters think all sailors are ******* lunatics. I am siding with the lunatics here. Sailing is its own medication. Up the meds I say!

Murrelet
1999 Mac26x
casting off.

[mighetto]

Bla, bla, bla - still no substance.

and yet readers. It is all about views. A year from now readers will not remember me. They will think of an idea that I planted and make it their own. Then we will progress as a sailing nation. I am doing the best I can now. It is going to take some time. I know that.

"so far you have lied, plagiarized, miss directed, and general talked about things you know nothing about."

Lied - about the TP52 class meetings, web site, general info about TP52's, I14's and other boats you could apparently only hope to ever be able to sail.
Plagiarized - High performance sailing, TP 52 web site and others (you have to cite your work)
As to talking about what you know nothing about - just look back on this thread alone.

Lets both do that. I don't see that I have done any of that. Give me just two specifics. One even.

As to movable ballast - you do know your Mac26X does not qualify? Movable ballast means side to side, not on and off the boat. The ballast in your Mac is only used to increase stability - It does little to improve righting moment (for it to help here it would have to be able to be moved and stored to weather off centerline).

I know that MacGregor Yachts takes credit for inventing water ballast and that movement on and off a boat is the movement that counts. I also know that artificial design rules limiting the amount of water ballast in a design is the reason for side to side pumping and that many water ballasted vessels, when allowed to will fill both sides. I also know that the Mac26x is the only model MacGregor Yachts has produced that qualifies as a moveble ballast vessel because the manufacture intended it to be sailed in both an unballasted and ballasted state. Hence the marketing of it as a radical (revolutionary) design. The other models, including the Mac26m, are conventional-contemporary-fixed-water-ballasted vessels. Not radical. Conventional like they like it on the east-is-least coast of the US where Teeter Principles still hold weigh. The contemporary-fixed-water-ballasted models are not meant to be sailed unballasted. Only the X is intended by the designer and manufacturer to be raced unballasted - just like a minitransat.

As to someone's comment about CE - I have referred to both center of effort and the EU ratting system. Builders like Goetz follow the guidelines of organizations like ABYC, ORC, and UL.

They also pay attention to SNAME. When they don't and market the vessel as TransPacific they are supporting a faulty (but not dangerous) design. You just should come to grips with this. Farr has corrected to the SNAME CRR. There should be no debate.

As to a Mac - any type showing up for the FL series, I would be surprised but a Mac 26 can not sail in the Trans Pac - does not meet the ORC requirements, never has, never could.

Water ballasted vessels as small as 24 feet are allowed to compete in the West Marine TransPac. The only modification to the Mac26x required appears to be a mast head antena.

Care to comment further on "Wind" as a true story - I can use the laughs ....

Farr's VP already has. It is the dinghy trained and maintained that will crew the VO70s and AC boats. The resumes of TP52 crew members will not get by the initial screens. What, you don't think the I-14 races were true? How about the necessity of being willing to pull the trigger in order to play with the big boys. I am Crying and Rolling On the Floor Laughing Me Arse Off (ROTFLMAO) Watch the film tonight.

[Skippy]

Originally Posted by Spaghetto

Power boaters think all sailors are ******* lunatics.

Watch your language Frank. It's impolite.

[mighetto]

Originally Posted by Skippy

Watch your language Frank. It's impolite.

Lets agree not to take things out of context. The context was

As to my entry count staying on 52...one of the contraindications of psychotropic treatment is petite mal seizures and the patient experiencing rapid recurring yet disconected events. So now we come to the pharmacists age old question...do we up the meds, cure the malady and suffer the side effects or drop them and live with a ******* lunatic? What's it going to be Frank

Within this context my response was neat wasn't it? I stand with the lunatics. Again.

Power boaters think all sailors are f*cking lunatics. This is why 3/4 of all boaters in the US reject sailboats and go for other craft. It need not be this way. All boaters are mates and should act that way. How about

Some power boaters think all sailors are f*cking lunatics.

Do you really disagree? What about

Sailing is its own medication. Up the meds I say!

This is great stuff. You fellows are muses. Give yourselves some credit. If the language is to harsh, then have the language filter turned on. It is capable of *&#@ out objectional words. Like I suppose mighetto

[Skippy]

Originally Posted by Spaghetto

I stand with the lunatics.

We all know that Frank. What we want you to do is go back to them and leave us alone.

[mighetto]

Originally Posted by TP 52 Defender

The I14 races where set ups with a gantry rig & and old ICE style 14. As to Wind - what the hell are you talking about? No basis in reality

As to IACC crews and the TP52's - lets look at crew lists ....

Esmeralda - Robbie Naysmith, Bob Whilley (both Oracle)
Bright Star - Mike Beasley, Dave Munders (Global Cat & Oracle, America One)
Sjambok - Gavin Brady, John Kosteki and others (Oracle, Prada, America One, Illbrook)
Yassoo - Mike Howard (Oracle)
Bright Star - Chris Cantrick and others (Various teams)
And many others (Quick list, apologies to those I missed).......
So um care to rethink your latest lie? Frank you never have and never will play with the Big Boys - so you should not comment on them (or attempt to foist you ignorance on those who have).

As to the latest Farr (Gen 3) boats - very little has changed as of my last conversation with a designer, as to the molds going to the EU or being sold to Spain, yet another lie (not a single mold has left the US and never will - can you guess why?).

Once again a MAC 26 X is not water ballasted in the same sense as purpose built racing boats. Being sailed in a ballasted & un- ballasted mode would also require you to be certified in the lightest mode (You do understand that right?).

Great stuff above.

First, The AC boats will be very different after 2007. Do you really think TP52 or prior AC experience will be relevant? It will not be. The AC boats will be more like the VO70s.

Second, I am serious about offers that can not be refused. The smart crew will seek vessels that enhace their sailing resumes. Those on the way out will accept offers because they can not refuse. Part of the offer will include a gag order preventing them from speaking out publically and the use of their good name to impart ligitimacy.

Coutts had his reasons for not getting aboard. When I see judgements like that I see a seaworthiness issue. Ether the crew or the boat was not seaworthy or the owner's presence itself made the boat unseaworthy. The judgement of Coutts is beyond question on these maters.

Second, I have consulted for Big Boys. Still do. I know their ways. Arther Andersen had their grip into me big time to the point that I was listed as an alumni of that tarnished organization in 1998. I make Big Boys cry big time. But I do not mean to do that here. Here, I mean to chat about the good the bad and the ugly of TP52s.

Third, you do know that Farr is not a US firm do you not. They have an east coast office but really why would they build molds in the US. The game is to chump US prospects into purchasing things TP52 just like it is to chump Spain. It is a big boy game. Trust me on this.

Lastly, certified in the lightest mode is how all Mac26x vessels should have been rated since 2003 in PHRF NW. My paper work was submitted so that we carry an additional 300 lbs of solid ballast. This is for convenience mostly but when the M came out it seemed appropriate. I will probably rerate without that later.

Now, my rater told me 6 months ago that the boat is a PHRF 130. How nuts is that? What I have concluded is that the program used by raters, a program developed by Jim Teeters, purposefully spits out garbage discouraging movable ballast designs from racing by giving the stupid ratings. Murrelet is rated a 241. The rater was a friggen genius to come up with this rating which allows moving ballast and lifting a rudder and not coming in last in fleet all the time. This is spinnaker class. I am told I can get a 256 if I want in cruising class. By now you should see that my boat is not a race design. She is a fast cruiser nonetheless.

[mighetto]

Originally Posted by TP 52 Defender

As to Mac 26 core - there is none, thats what an all fiberglass construction means (Mac web site) http://www.macgregorsailboats.com/construction.html

What Frank claims to have seen as core was glass mat.

What I saw was not what was used in Trader or Icon. That is for certain. It was honnycomb something white and likely explains why copies of the Mac26x are 300 lbs heavier. Did I ever call it core? I don't think I did. If so, I appologize. MacGregor Yachts used some kind of core material in the top deck of the pre 1998 models. These are the models selling today for 24,000. Not bad for a boat that originally cost 17,000. But not yet close to the 40,000 actual value. Anyway 130 lbs of weight was taken out of the top deck by going to a new material, possibly what I saw during my factory visit. Outside of the use of liners, I do not think the construction methods different in the model now being produced than what was used for the Mac26x. Can we stay on topic - TP52s, not me and my Mac.

[mighetto]

Originally Posted by TP 52 Defender

Care to provide a link to your PHRF number or copy of your certificate?

As to the big boys I was refering to sailing. As to the molds they are owned by owners and builders - not Farr. The Farr molds are still up in Newport, RI at the builders.

You really need to read the prior posts. Check the PHRF NW web site in January. It will either say 241 or 256. I only responded to the raters email this morning that my intention has always been to race in Spinnaker class. The cruising class rating does nothing for me. As you review the prior posts take note of the letter being sent to PHRF NW. We advance in this sport through protests. If that is your intention, then do so. It is good for the sport.

[Andrew Mason]

Frank

I noticed that you signed up to the Maxsurf Academic web site on the 28th of december.

The site is intended for valid students only. Can you let me know just what course in yacht design or naval architecture you are studying at "City University"? Your student number 12345678 seems a bit unusual too.

Normally I would just delete your login, but I'll let it stand in this case. Hopefully you'll do the world a favour and learn something about yacht design from it.

Andrew