Buccaneer 24 Builders Forum

OTB.
You said:- "Our test mule floats will sit lower by the attrition of float depth"
Did you mean "Addition of float depth" ??

 

Don't panic yourself about what we are changing on the test mule Barry as you observed in your post above it is it's own thing. From an armchair designers point of view many about now are scratching their heads making assumptions with bits of the picture.
We have screeds of calculations weight studys etc here on it and the visual of all that is coming together now before us, the computer can say what it likes but until it is a) mocked up and all is as it should be.
b) it gets built and thrashed then modified where we see fit to meet it's end program for us.
c) it gets the folding system being developed fitted to prototype against known peramaters.
d) then all going well and only then we will consider plan sales for the completed "tested" Buc 24 test mule.
Until then all bets are off regarding the test mule.
In the interum freshen up plans will become available simply incorporating most buc 24 mods assembled as professional plans in one place.
What builders decide to incorporate into their stock build is to their own desire from there

 

No panic! Lol was just making observation. I like it so far! And no doubt all is being weighed and calc'd. I was as you say just arm chairing for sport. While this time round I plan to do a stock buc I'm observing progress cause next build, who knows! Trust me I get that your doing what I'm smart enough to know I can't do, and what some seem to think they can, without recourse, and that is take a whole new road with something. Not me! Sticking to the plan Stan!


Barry

 

No ment through the natural attrition of the float body of the test mule floats being deeper as per Irens style and where our beam mounting points are as for the test mule we need it demountable as further down the track when we offer up the folding system it goes into same strengthened areas saving a shipload of rebuilding again.
If attrition is the incorrect term,/fraze it is simply my poor grammar a scholar I was not was too busy sketching boats and dreaming of getting out of the land locked valley I grew up in to take that english stuff in then

 

Just like to make a comment about the "Tippy" stock B24 when at anchor.
It's no big deal.
Lock designed the dihedral of the tubular crossarms so that the float keels barely touched the water. When tacking ,as the boat came up head to wind, both floats were out of the water , which accounts for the B24s very quick tacking.
Piver type Tris had all three hulls in the water at all times, and we all know how slow they were to tack.
When we slept three people on our B24 we simply moved the sail bags out of the fore berth and put them in the lee side net, held down with shock cord.
Solved the overnight tippiness.

 

Thanks Os7
Our reasoning is a fine line between that you have described (and hopefully if all calcs for the test mule are right) then the centre hull should skim fly without too much air drag from the structure at an angle above what we think is right and those great light air property's the buc has. If we get it wrong adjustment will be made.

 

Would it make sense to build the mule to 8.5 rule ?

 

Hi Reuben
Yes it would but we will leave the dedicated 8.5 one to Nigel when he has time to do a design brief justice (word is he got scorched by the last small design so understandable we must wait) as we are absolute rank amateurs by comparison to think we could suck the absolute maximum out of a rule.
The test mule is settling at 8.2 so not far off.
We have the Lerouge 8.5 cat coming online early in 2015 to fill the 8.5 market should anyone out of NZ get serious, like Erik said at the sail area dictated by the NZ rule it is weight sensitive to the maximum so dollar cost goes up as opposed to an international rig JFWIW we are on the fence re rig.

 

It's interesting that the New Zealand Multihull club, 8.5 multihull rule page says:-
""Entry level for the class remains the venerable GBE or other older designs, such as the Buccaneer 24."
and
"This brings up an important point - NZ 8.5 multi's don't have to be 8.5 metres long. Provided a boat is within the box dimensions and meets the other requirements it can be measured under the rule (eg. Buccaneer 24 Capricorn)."

 

There you are.
Get (Buy, Build or Steal) a Bucc 24, flatten out the tail section, add a prodder, huge sail plan with rotating mast, vertical dagger-----and there you go.
Any further mods will only add un-necessary weight.

 

Discussion of the NZ 8.5M box rule is OT for this thread so I have opened a new thread on that subject.
Just Google "New Zealand multihull 8.5M box rule".

 

B24 Alternative Vertical Daggerboard

Here are the pics of the board and case. Re size and print out landscape.

 

Questions. :?:

 

Hello from the Cayman Islands.
I am new to the forum but have been an avid reader for some time. I am just finishing up a small outrigger canoe tri and ready for a new challenge. I have a Tornado and was looking at using that nice square top rig on the B24 but several people have said it might not be strong enough due to the high righting moment of the B24. Any opinions on using the sails on maybe a wing mast.

 

Does anyone have plans for a wing mast for the B24? Shipping in a long item like a mast is very expensive, but thats the price we pay for living in paradise. Building a wing here would be cheaper.