Trailerable Multihulls

Glad to hear someone else is concentrating on displacement activity by writing about small lightweight multihulls!!! Me, I'm supposed to be doing my annual tax returns, which I find even more fun than gardening.

There are two options for the Wizard/Sango launching procedure, depending in part on whether you are launching from a slip or at low tide on the beach.

We have done it both ways.

If you launch on a slip you can usually back the trailer into the water with a long extension on the trailer and the boat will open up automatically. That's obviously the easy way.

If you are launching on a beach you can open the hulls out using the trailer winch and then by lowering the trailer "goal posts" ease the boat either onto the beach or into shallow water. You do the reverse when you've finished sailing, or when putting the boat onto the trailer for the first time after building it (how DO you do that with a Farrier? - I've never worked it out - nor how you antifoul the main hull)

It's a bit hard to describe, but the trailer drawings, part of the plans, show it all. When the Wizard was tested by Practical Boat Owner the reporter noted it took about 20 minutes to open out and lower the boat to the ground and then raise the mast (again with the trailer winch) to await the tide. And that was with no lifting or straining and stopping while photos of the process were taken. In comparison, in front of the same reporter, a Strider on a telescopic trailer took 40 minutes from trailing to launching.

One reason for the Wizard's high cuddy is that it makes a very secure tabernacle so the mast cannot fall down even if the shrouds are removed. It also makes the mast behave like a keel stepped mast, so it can be a lighter section - again making rigging easier.

I hope this clarifies the design

best wishes

Richard Woods of Woods Designs

www.sailingcatamarans.com

 

Hello Meanz Beanz,

Thanks. I'll try to keep them midway.

Glad to hear it.

This is a problem for me. I'm not in the habit of offending anyone whether I do it consiously or not. I would still prefer that you pointed out the statement so I can edit it.

If this had been in the initial post, I would probably have considered the 5 hours fast because once it is all said and done, a prudent operator would double check everything again before pulling out. Now, I don't believe the 5 hours was a lot of time based on the above.

What? Design for a specific chop? Where did you read that? Can you provide a reference? How is it decided what chop to design for? Any idea what the TR27B should be designed for as offshore capable?


Thanks
J

 

Indeed. Glad to be among this company.

J

 

Actually, most of the work is done by the skipper. He is definitely highly experienced (on lots of boats, not just multihulls or F-boats), and it probably doesn't take him a whole lot longer to do it by himself. Which he does frequently.

I hope nothing I said was taken as being derogatory to Peter Boyd. It does take the F9's we race against longer to rig and derig than it does us. But not hours longer. I was trying to point out to Peter some constructive areas to look at to take some time out of his process.

The F9 mast is harder to handle than an F27's. One thing that isn't widely appreciated is the impact different stay arrangements have. The F27 has fixed inner shrouds that help stabilize the mast sideways when raising and lowering. The F24 MKI has small diameter baby shrouds to the base of the spreaders that are only there to stabilize the mast when raising and lowering. On a boat that only has shrouds led to the amas, it's possible to arrange the geometry so the mast is properly supported as the hulls fold, but it takes additional support to stabilize the mast on the way down. This necessarily adds to the time required to trailer.

As another benchmark, it took us 8 hours to demount a Chris White Hammerhead 34 trimaran and ready it for transport. This was with three people working, plus the assistance of a forklift crew to pluck the mast, lift the boat out of the water, and lift the amas and set them on the cradle as they were demounted. Most of that time was spent completely stripping all the stays and spreaders off the mast, removing the nets, etc. One person had done the job before, the other two helpers were newbies. The vast majority of this work is not required for trailering a Farrier.

That's why I suspected the 5 hour figure included a lot of demounting that may not have been required. 1 hour water-to-road is not at all an unreasonable number for an F9.

I'm not that familiar with the Laser, but I think a sliding gunter in a pocket could be a good way to go. The mast compression loads on 30 ft multihull can be considerable, however, so that would have to be factored in. As well as the ability to reef a luff-pocket sail. But I'm actually enamored with large (20% - 30% chord) luff pockets, and they would provide plenty of slack for accordion-ing when lowered or reefed.

 

Trailable multihulls.

I just started reading this thread and find it interesting. I have experience with a Macgregor 36 cat i owned,this is a fairly sizable boat and it was quite possible for me to go from road to sail away without help but it took considerably longer than with 1 extra person.What was important was that the entire operation could be carried out without drama.Obviously the biggest potential for drama .is the raising or lowering of the 44ft mast but because of some wise choices made by Roger Macgregor this operation was quite safe.
1/ The crossbeams are round tube,not mast extrusions like many net and tube cats.
2/The use of a low aspect single spreader masthead rig like a monohull rather than the three stay rotating rig which the prototype had.
By combining these he was able to have a simple mast base and chainplates for the cap shrouds which wrap around the beam so ,because they are perfectly in line the mast is controlled from side to side.this is the biggest problem with most trailable boats.The first time we demounted the boat my son and i did it in about 6 hrs without the benefit of the telescoping trailer i later built,i did refine the system later to reduce the time to 2 -3 hrs ,still not fast enough to trailer sail it but good enough for a large offshore capable cat.
Steve

 

Hello Steve,

Welcome and thanks for visiting. I'm glad to hear you find the thread interesting. It is about to get more interesting in the very near future.

Ahhh...the Mac 36. I love that boat. I sailed on one several years back when I was an avid monohuller and didn't really appreciate multi's and the speed on that thing was unbelievable. It left a hell of an impression. I was really taken back by the huge hinged top and feared that one good wave would sink it, but the skipper told me that the vessel has enough built in foam flotation that it couldn't sink. He also said the designer had developed a system to right her without outside assistance if she went turtle. She was however, spartan in order to keep her speed. I recently saw an advert with a Mac 36 on the telescoping trailer. If I find it again, I'll post it.

Hmmm...well, it is demountable. Those times are not excessive. I would think that she would remain in the water for the season, so in all reality, that time is stretched over the season, one time to splash her and one time to bring her home. I'm trying to set up the TR27B so that she can be splashed in an hour, tops, and stowed to tow in the same. If I can do this, then the cost to keep the design is further reduced to just ramp fees, if any, instead of even just 1 season. Drop her in, park the trailer or have it taken home, get lost for the weekend or week etc., and pull her out and off to the next cruising ground or home. No slip fees. unless the skipper wants to pay them, but, optional.

At 2-3 hours, I would be inclined to say that is the top end that I would consider for a trailer sailor. That's me. I would however consider her a trailor sailor that I would not mind spending a couple of hours on in order to splash her for say a month or more on the water.

I didn't know she was offshore capable. The skipper that I ran with mentioned that she can race offshore in supervised conditions, but that she was an inshore vessel for all intensive purposes. Does the designer claim offshore rating or design? Have any info on that? In any event, she is very very nice and fast as hell.

Can you share some information on the trailer that you built? I have been looking around at quite a few and find that it is possible to get the trailer that will be required for the TR27B for less than $6K, brand new out of the box, with everything I envision as required. I'm shooting for the purchase of a flatbed with dual 3500# axels for about $2K and then provide plans to modify it and try to bring her in under $4K.

Thanks
J

 

JCD,thanks for the good word on the Mac 36,i actually think they offer more bang for the buck performance wise than probably any sailboat afloat in the US.I did a lot of research before i bought it in 1989 and was amazed by the racing sucesses in the late 1970s and early 1980s,to this day no monohull has sailed the ensenada race as fast as the mac 36 tall rig Kristine in 1983(second to finish to Double Bullet by 8 mins although the 80ft plus canting keel boats are getting close. I knew when i said it was offshore capable i would get a response and i know i wouldnt do it but a few have sailed to Hawaii and a chap by the name of Hal Andersen circumnavigated the carribbean and then soloed one across the Atlantic from Miami to Coppenhagen and got to put the floatation to the test when he was hit by a trawler 225mls sw of the scilly isles,he was able to continue on with the bow of 1 hull broken off and complete the journey without help.He wrote about it in the july /aug issue of Mulltihulls magazine in a story titled "a few feet from eternity" so while im sure Macgregor would not recomend it offshore neither does Farrier recomend his folding tris.
The trailer i built was also based on a flatbed trailer frame for which i built a pair of telescoping mechanisms which bolted to the frame, they each consisted of 2-8ft lengths of 4" square tube welded side by side with mounting brackets welded to the bottom.and a steel roller at the outer end of each tube with the top of the roller maybe 1/4"above the inside of the tube.Inside of these were smaller heavier wall tubes with steel rollers mounted in the inner end and a 3" x1/4"flat bar on edge welded to the top on the outer end which had the plywood cradles bolted to them,you need to cut a slot in the top of the outer tube to accept this.I pushed the hulls out a couple of feet at a time so the trailer didnt tip over and could go from 8ft to 18ft in just a few minutes .
Steve.

 

Links gents? We antipodeans don't always know the designs you talk of .... its more fun if we can follow along

 

This one?

 

Looks like it!
http://www.tompatterson.com/Sailing/Sailing/Sailing11.html

 

Thks, looks like a big ol Seawind 24' in many ways... should be fun!

 

Hello Steve,

Found it. It is attached.

J

 

Hawdy Meanz,

Link?
Here you go...on the whole Mac line. I want to contribute to your reference library.

http://macgregor-sailor.com/content/blogcategory/22/47/


J

 

Hello again Steve,

She is one fast puppy. It's my understanding that all the Mac designs have outstanding speed due to their long lines and light weight. Even his 65 foot mono holds unbroken records.

I'm glad the response I gave was expected. I really didn't know that it was offshore capable although I suspected she wasn't. I would have never suspected she wasn't with all the offshore records they hold. But she has really lean lines so I suspect the stores must also be light.

I would do it. I believe a safe passage is 90% weather and the rest is the skipper. Completing a trip with one hull broken-off unassisted is amazing. The incorporated flotation was in this case a life saver. Did it say in the article what other steps he took to keep the ocean out?

Thanks for the info. I will concentrate on it.
The TR27B is going to be a little bit heavier so I imagine the beams may have to be a little bit larger and all the other components. Hopefully, I will be able to open both sides simultaneously if screw jacks are incorporated so falling over may not be an issue.

On a positive note, if the trailer is 7 feet wide, then the telescope will only have to travel 3' outboard to the hull centerline, so maybe the bars will be good enough. Still to early to tell.

A few minutes from closed to open is music to my ears.

Sorry...I forgot to ask you. Did you get a manual when you purchased and if you did, does it give an explanation on the procedure for righting her unassisted if she goes turtle? Any other literature that you've read on it? I won't ask if you've tested it.

Thanks
J

 

JCD,no i didnt get a manual with the boat but i called Macgregor and they sent me a poor quality copy which gave the instructions,if you send an adress ill send you a copy.The boats came new with a masthead float which kept them from turning turtle.there is a photo sequence of the process which involved the 21ft spinnaker pole clipped to a fitting on the inside face of the hull amidship,a halyard and a large waterbag. Im not sure anyone has actually done it in real world circumstances.Considering that over 200 were built i have never heard of one capsizing under sail,i did read of one flipping on a mooring in Belize in a hurricane some years ago.I think due to the rather good safety record pretty much everyone removed the float.I reclaimed that wasted 18" for extra luff length.
I considered making the hulls extend together but in the end kept it simple and manually pushed a stern a couple of feet ,then the other,then a bow, then the other and just repeated until it was fully extended,i could do this alone,with 2 people you could push bow and stern together.
I think the outer tubes were 4"x4"x3/16"

and the inner tubes were 3"x3"x1/4"
Steve.