Single-person keelboat stability

[PAR]

It’s quite amazing how a person with as many previous posts as yourself, can only muster innuendo, assumption and insult, particularly in regard to people you don’t know and who’s skill sets you are clearly in poor regard of. Arbitrary speculation, laced with barbs are the products of a small, narrow focus mind and it would seem your “reputation points” reflect what most have already derived from your previous input here on this board. Why should anyone consider your opinions, especially in respect to the lack of it you’ve shown others, which is likely just a latent expression of yourself?

In this particular instance you’ve offered a good prospect for the original poster’s question. Of course you couldn’t resist an obviously feeble attempt to “up” yourself by belittling others and off you went on several occasions. Possibly another tactic could be suggested more effective Paul, such as a defined discussion and debate. Then naturally you’d have to accept the realities of your personality traits and make adjustments, or face the prospect of having even less reputation then those that have just joined the forum, of which you are quite close to now, congratulations.

[Paul B]

Originally Posted by PAR

Arbitrary speculation, laced with barbs are the products of a small, narrow focus mind

Cite, please.

Originally Posted by PAR

and it would seem your “reputation points” reflect .

Reputation point? Seriously? I had no idea such a thing existed, and the instrument to measure how little I care has yet to be invented.

Originally Posted by PAR

Of course you couldn’t resist an obviously feeble attempt to “up” yourself by belittling others .. personality traits and make adjustments, or face the prospect of having even less reputation then those that have just joined the forum, of which you are quite close to now, congratulations.

Your reply makes it seem maybe something wasn't so feeble? I have no need to "up" myself, but simply illuminate this instance of the dullard roar against reality.

Maybe you feel you need some points here to feel good about yourself. Yes, show everyone your expertise. Maybe you should spend some time with some other rum sodden crunchies and collectively spew bile at the "terrible modern boats" and the "blue blazers crowd at those damn yacht clubs". You can appease yourselves by saying all manner of salty things like "jib and jigger". After that I'm sure you will feel righty-right.

[alan white]

"You could divide the rig up into smaller, lower aspect pieces, but then some elements of your performance envelope will suffer."

Seems PAR did correctly analyze the limitations placed on your handicap exanple. Its mast is 23.5 ft with a boat length of 19 ft, overwide beam of 7.5 ft. Sounds like a classic low aspect rig to me. And PAR pointed out that performance would suffer due to the necessity of spreading sail area out down low.
No matter what you do, if the crew is to remain in the middle, either some aspect of performance must suffer, or some sort of movable ballast will be required.
Not old fashioned thinking, just physics at work.

[PAR]

Bait is an easy thing to lay, but only fools and rats stick their head under the bar for a nibble. You've admirably proven my assessments of you. Again, congratulations are in order, you passed with flying colors.

Since you were so willing, lets see what you really are, as I know my abilities and reputation. I know how many of my designs are being built world wide and how many have been crafted under my hand. There are even forum members here, building my designs. So, how many designs have you penned for a client? How about the number of boats that bear your builder's plate or better yet your USCG prefix?

I don't usually get into pissing contests, but sometimes *******s should be wiped after a big stink comes through.

[Hernandiz]

Well...

My first worries was the applicability of the Wind pressure coefficient and the Dellenbaugh angle.
I'm sure that the canting keel is needed to reach the 1.5 WPC and I get close to it but the skud 18 doesn't have such complex keel.
I will try to use some sketch from the skud class site to approximate the righting moment.

That would be interesting to compare the 2 similar design
disp= 838 vs 890
sail area= 163 vs 166
beam= 7.5 vs 6
draft= 5.6 vs 6.6

[Hernandiz]

Results are surprising...
with some sketch from the skud 18 class rule and some pics I made a model of the hull. The weights are from the designer site, class rule and wiki. I think it's accurate enough to make a comparison...

here are the surprise...

assuming a 210 pound skipper sit at the centreline.
The Wind pressure coefficient is between 0.65 and 0.7. That's far away from my theory of 1.5 and realy close to the Kinney's diagram.

I also note that my hull is inappropriate, I will reshape again.

here is my approximated skud hull


If someone know about the skud. Did the hull look accurate? is that boat tender or stiff?

[Paul B]

Originally Posted by PAR

Bait is an easy thing to lay, but only fools and rats stick their head under the bar for a nibble.

You said it, I didn't.

Originally Posted by PAR

Since you were so willing, lets see what you really are, as I know my abilities and reputation. I know how many of my designs are being built world wide and how many have been crafted under my hand. There are even forum members here, building my designs. So, how many designs have you penned for a client? How about the number of boats that bear your builder's plate or better yet your USCG prefix?

Sorry not to recognize your stature in the industry. My faux pas I suppose.

If it makes you feel better thinking you have had more success than someone else on a bulletin board, well you go girl.


The one thing I do know is more Macgregor 26s have been built than boats my pencil has been involved with. Does that make me envious of that design?

[Paul B]

Originally Posted by alan white

"You could divide the rig up into smaller, lower aspect pieces, but then some elements of your performance envelope will suffer."

Seems PAR did correctly analyze the limitations placed on your handicap exanple. Its mast is 23.5 ft with a boat length of 19 ft,

Seeing as how you know what you pal said, you are bing disingenuous with your comment. No surprise you are of the same mindest as PAR. I will admit you do post far more disinformation on this board than he does. Congratulations.

As to your idea to compare the length of the boat with the rig height, maybe you should check out a high performance dinghy like the 505, and then comment again.

[alan white]

It's true I post a lot of disinformation. I never claimed to be telling the whole truth. It's not my desire to be empirically accurate because I know that there is no one true explanation.
What do you think, Paul?

[PAR]

So Paul, how many clients have had you draw up yachts for them? What's your experience or I guess what I'm asking is there a rationale behind your attitude, besides reading way too many magazines.

[Paul B]

Originally Posted by PAR

So Paul, how many clients have had you draw up yachts for them? What's your experience or I guess what I'm asking is there a rationale behind your attitude, besides reading way too many magazines.

After hearing of your fantastic relevance to the art, how could someone such as I ever compete?

Now does that make you feel better?


Hopefully you'll happily go back to drawing the cartoons of your gingerbread boats. No doubt you'll find a few customers who find them attractive. As I mentioned in another thread, there are plenty of wingnut "designers" out there who match perfectly with the wingnut dreamers.

Capt. Nat and L. Francis are looking down at you and having a good laugh.

[PAR]

In other words, you are an arm chair boater, never built anything, never designed anything, education included most of high school and most likely never proud of you work, at least not enough to warrant patting yourself on the back.

You'll sole joy in life is degradation and belittling those that have attempted to attain their goals. 600 plus contributions to this forum and the best you can muster is the rank of a antagonist. Good luck in your future endeavors, attempting to tear successful people down to your level. I can think of little more fruitless an enterprise

[Paul B]

Originally Posted by PAR

In other words, you are an arm chair boater, never built anything, never designed anything, education included most of high school and most likely never proud of you work, at least not enough to warrant patting yourself on the back.

You'll sole joy in life is degradation and belittling those that have attempted to attain their goals. 600 plus contributions to this forum and the best you can muster is the rank of a antagonist. Good luck in your future endeavors, attempting to tear successful people down to your level. I can think of little more fruitless an enterprise

Ho ho, looks like someone has a little captain in 'em tonight.

Funny, this armchair boater might have been dominating on the racecourse this weekend, while someone else was sitting at a keyboard. Projecting much there, rummy?

I have no doubt you've already wasted time looking into "me". So your schoolboy name calling looks even more pathetic.

Aside from the fact that we both know which of us has had more success in sailing design, I have to tell you it is more lucrative to design items in other fields.

Just FYI, successful people don't need to pat themselves on the back. Speaking for myself, I have no need to try and impress someone like you. I will say for you to get to my level it wouldn't be tearing down, you'd need a couple of crates to stand on.

It must be horrible to go through life knowing you don't have the chops. Hey, maybe if you can get a high enough rating on a bulletin board you'll look in the mirror and not see a failure.