Historical multihulls

[Skip JayR]

One suggestion I can think of is to relocate and set up your job in the area you want to move to first. Then start looking for boats, the area you talked about will have more to choose from and the logistics will be much simpler.

It is in work... Guess, why I setup the thread in the CF forum:
"It can't be Planet Earth. - It must be a Multihull Haven Heaven !"

As said, lots of things around... not all done over night. Slowly step-by-step.

 

[pogo]

But Rob James in his book Multihulls Offshore wrote he was definitely considering foils being placed in CC's floats. If that had occurred the too fine main hull bow and the low buoyancy pointed after sections of the floats would have, with foils, rectified earlier failings; foils would have lifted floats and main hull bow too - so CC would have been an entirely different animal.
Rob James was ahead of his times - a tragedy that he was lost.

As far as I know it was James Grogono who suggested Rob James to install retractable foils on COLT CARS---that was in 1983.

In James Grogono's book " Icarus-the boat that flies" are sketches of the clever and calculated arrangement he proposed.

Diagonal Triplane Foils ( Ladderfoils) on the outer side of each ama , lateral positioned besides the mast.
Uppest foil is the smallest , positioned half of ama' s freeboard.
Foil in the middle under the ama.
Lowest Foil w. vertical tip is the biggest.
No fences.
the whole construction was retractable , hinged to the ama deck.
Flight stabilization by a permanent inverted t- rudder.

In his book " Multihulls Offshore" Rob James shows other foil arrangements and no arrangement for COLT CARS ( chapter " Future trends" ) . He also states that the days of glory of offshore foiling would be still a long way off. That was before publishing his book in 1983, and, before Grogonos visit.

 

[Skip JayR]

Rob James in his book Multihulls Offshore wrote he was definitely considering foils being placed in CC's floats. If that had occurred the too fine main hull bow and the low buoyancy pointed after sections of the floats would have, with foils, rectified earlier failings; foils would have lifted floats and main hull bow too - so CC would have been an entirely different animal. Rob James was ahead of his times.

Gary, I have thought this when seeing CC aka Spirit of Ireland, but not knowing anything about the boat owner. - Immediatelly I had the thought: With modern foils this boat must be a "burner".

Here a shot of the boat when it was sailing under name "Red Star - Night Star" from 1984 on...

(This boat then was sold in 1988... via advertising in the April edition of magazine "Voiles et Voiliers" it was offered at a prize of 89 000 £. Today this prize would be 197.989 £ = 268.06 Euro (with a correctly calculated annually inflation rate of 3.25% till 2014). Chay Blyth sailed it in 1988 for the OSTAR under new name NCR.)

In my view the front section of the main hull has enough volume... and the amas wouldnt need a re-design if they'd get modern foils to create more uplift.

Pitty I didnt find a video of this boat... would be great to see her "in action".

 

[Gary Baigent]

quote:
"In his book " Multihulls Offshore" Rob James shows other foil arrangements and no arrangement for COLT CARS ( chapter " Future trends" ) . He also states that the days of glory of offshore foiling would be still a long way off. That was before publishing his book in 1983, and, before Grogonos visit."

There also is a photograph of Colt Cars on page 276 Multihulls Offshore where Rob James caption-writes,
"A well-developed conventional multihull (referring to the image of Colt Cars) which will benefit from the addition of hydrofoils fitted in line with the forward beam and outside the floats."
Blatantly obvious he was giving serious thought to foil additions? See also his list of differing foil designs on page 279.
Plus he was giving thought to a wing mast on Colt Cars, see the drawing page 277, plate 88.
As said, different beast entirely to the original.

 

[Ilan Voyager]

correct. and it boasts a rather checkered history. Not a good boat even when new, probably one to avoid now

RW

I agree with your statement. If I remember well it was the lone tentative of designing multis by Ron Holland. He understood and returned back to the monos. There is a long list of monohull designers trying once their skills on multis with results ranging from barely acceptable to disastrous. The fine high bow with flares maybe it's beautiful but it is a death trap. The flagrant lack of volumes of the amas (specially at the stern) is another trap. You have to sail it like you drive a 1970 WV Beetle, slowly and praying. Rabbit feet, horse shoes, and medals of St Anthony are counselled, that may help. When I look at these pics I remember what skippers, crews, builders told me about these boats...so I can't like them. This kind of design is totally obsolete, the NA have learnt the lesson.

Skip JayR. ACapella is totally different from Spirit of Ireland. The only thing they have in common is three hulls. And even Charlie (I know him) did not consider it as safe in racing conditions when it was in its original state. He has capsized at least once with ACapella. The tri after been rescued (it stayed one year or more deriving in the Atlantic), has been very heavily modified to make it safer and hopefully faster. When a old Newick/Greene tri sinks suddenly an ama into 1 foot of green water, you have to pray very fast. Some learnt to pray the complete pater noster in less than 3 seconds, and to release the main sheet even faster. When you're alone and surprised while you're away the main sheet you're f....No margin.

Skip JayR. The pic of the interior of Spirit of Ireland shows an awful work. That's ugly and look well at the pic, the front small doors are not even correctly placed. I would be ashamed if I make something like that.
No, these boats were not good and are not good. Age has changed nothing. None of these boats had a true good career against serious opposition I mean the French Flying Circus (Frenchies produced also their share of bad designs), all had serious structural problems. Also all are dangerous, compared with more recent and better designs.

I do agree with Mr Woods, these boats had to be modified and improved, and the crews showed their ability. Paragon in its original state was sometimes a fast dog, but was a dog.

Foils on the amas was already done in 1979 like on VSD II. Paul Ricard was a foiler same year. PIR2, and many others later. Foils are an old thing on multis. Some were used to improve flawed designs.

And with the designs of multis end 80/beginning 90 foils were forgotten as they were considered a fragile nuisance, but the idea was never abandoned, a lot of people worked on for years. The progress were made with the designs, and the materials. The profiles of the 2015 foils have little resemblance with the old ones.

 

[redreuben]

Bucc 24

1- Crowther had a very solid engineering background at the difference of a lot of NA of small boats. Not all of the following designs were so good...some cruising cats made in France were frankly...and the shipyard had to cease the operations because of weak sales. Compared to a VPLP design of same size there was no match.
2- The hydro of the main hull was rather good. Some extended it to 28 feet to have less rocker as the tri is not famous in "strong" wind. The weight was good.
3- The amas were very decent. Enormous and very long considering the period of design. Some were modified with bigger amas.
4- It was used by good amateurs in mostly light weather, the strong point of this tri, and probably not pushed to the extreme limit in extreme conditions. With a 24 feet tri you do not affront storms, nor 40 feet waves...
Put on a band of pro Frenchies in a race in front of La Trinité with a 35 knots wind and surely they will at least dismast it. They are as brutish as a 240 pounds Samoan All Black hitting a poor 160 pounds guy who had the bad luck of grasping the ball.
5- There are surely several that flipped, capsized etc. It's a probabilistic certitude. Simply we do not know.
And Crowther was inspired the day he drawn it...But compared to some recent 24-25 feet, it will be maybe honourable in light weather but far from bring a winner. It's a very good vintage boat but I would never build one now. As Mr Woods said the Crowthers have never been considered fast in Europe. The amateur racing level in UK and France is very high with plenty of good designs. Happily the sail clubs have forbidden the use of sabres and grapnels, as the races are intense enough. Arriving to the first buoy in a Solent race of the Cowes Week is an experience that can make you consider that water colour painting is an activity better suited for you.

Ilan Voyager,
Interesting comments, the trouble with modern designs is the greater level of materials technology required to build them and of course the more sophisticated shapes, which is why I think the Bucc has maintained such interest at an amateur level. I myself live on the west coast of Australia where the regular sea breeze is at least 20 knots, the Ezifold MkIII Bucc has smoothed out the rocker and added length to the floats, would you consider this adequate to increase the seaworthyness of the boat in a stronger breeze ?

 

[Gary Baigent]

Strange that Hydroptere has been successful with old fashioned surface piercing foils designed decades ago? Sure they have been refined - but still the original basic design.
18 m Paragon in her day thrashed all the French 25 m maxi catamarans at ... La Trinite I think it was, large race gathering of multihulls anyway.
Sure, foils have been around since before Paul Ricard but Rob James was still being avant garde with alterations to Colt Cars. And what is wrong with improving flawed desighs with their additions?
Certainly foil design and development has improved - but in reality they are at base, what began way back with Williwaw - that is angles and Vs. Plus ca change etc.

 

[cavalier mk2]

First let's ask Illan some hard questions. llan, was your recent proa crash and hospitalization caused by a design error or a operator error? Since it was destroyed do you consider the engineering inadequate? With your historical perspective in use how did this accident happen?

 

[oldsailor7]

Ilan Voyager,
Interesting comments, the trouble with modern designs is the greater level of materials technology required to build them and of course the more sophisticated shapes, which is why I think the Bucc has maintained such interest at an amateur level. I myself live on the west coast of Australia where the regular sea breeze is at least 20 knots, the Ezifold MkIII Bucc has smoothed out the rocker and added length to the floats, would you consider this adequate to increase the seaworthyness of the boat in a stronger breeze ?

I am a little bit dismayed at the idea that a B24 would not be up to ocean conditions.
I intended to sail mine in the 1971 New York/Bermuda race. I had received the permission from the race committee to enter the race, with defined safety conditions. Unfortunately I didn't complete the boat in time to have a proper shakedown and transport to New York.
Subsequent sailing in very bad conditions on lake Ontario, (it's self an inland sea, with very nasty bad weather habits), assured me it was a very tough little sea boat, which could look after it's crew.
I think Samnz experiences and successes with his race winning B24 has adequately proved how much the design can take and still come up trumps.
I think the Ezfold Mk3 Bucc will be a winner.

 

[Ilan Voyager]

Ilan Voyager,
Interesting comments, the trouble with modern designs is the greater level of materials technology required to build them and of course the more sophisticated shapes, which is why I think the Bucc has maintained such interest at an amateur level. I myself live on the west coast of Australia where the regular sea breeze is at least 20 knots, the Ezifold MkIII Bucc has smoothed out the rocker and added length to the floats, would you consider this adequate to increase the seaworthyness of the boat in a stronger breeze ?

I had to search what was the Ezifold MkIII Bucc...No one pic... Less rocker, more length and volume on the amas are always an improvement for seaworthiness.
Remain that also counts the repartition of these volumes, the shape of the bows and I have no idea how it has been done on this boat. The base is good, the Buccaneer has showed to be a good boat. The Buccaneer has lot of positive things; it works well for a decent price, people has lots of experience with it, many people sail it. It's fast enough to be fun so at amateur level it's a great boat.
The modified plans are very recent as I have seen on Facebook and are pretty expensive 1450 NZ dollars; I would wait and see what happens with these plans...Foam amas are not cheap. Carbon wing masts are expensive. All the details I could read show an expensive boat for racing, which is going away of the simple plywood boat.
At least 20 knots it's a lot of wind. Forget wing masts and complicated rigs, you have largely enough wind thus power. For daysailers a wing mast is a nuisance. A simple robust sail plan with 2 or 3 reefs is more useful at amateur level.
Small modern multis do not need to be in composites or "sophisticated", that's marketing hype. The shapes have become simpler and fuller, if you "forget" the inversed bow the last fashion, and the decks are more round. There is not a lot of good shapes on small multis. Look at the Attitude (2005) 8.5 m catamaran humbly made with compounded plywood.
Consider also that in these small sizes catamarans are as good and far simpler and cheaper. Tris are expensive and "complicated" boats to build, and I feel that that "complexity" does not pay high dividends under 30-35 feet. Very personal opinion. All depends on your budget...

 

[Ilan Voyager]

First let's ask Illan some hard questions. llan, was your recent proa crash and hospitalization caused by a design error or a operator error? Since it was destroyed do you consider the engineering inadequate? With your historical perspective in use how did this accident happen?

The accident is not recent, it was 25 years ago. Totally my mistake, I jumped before hundreds of waves from 3 to 20 feet and made some nice schuss with catamarans and with this proa which did pretty well its function and was robust enough.
Simply, being overconfident, I jumped too strongly and directly a wave about maybe 15 feet high with a solid 25 knots wind, I made a splendid fly like in the videos but being in middle air I let the boat flip over me, the reception was on the wrong side, the turtle was on his back, and I was under the proa...The rear arm hitted me on the head, I drank lots of seawater while being knocked down. As I was very close to the beach, I and the proa were pushed to the beach in a few minutes, rolled on the sand and gravel by the breaking waves and beaten. You can imagine what happened to the mast and the boat and how many bruises I got...I went to the hospital to have 7 stitches on the head, and a bent but not broken left wrist. That's my historical perspective. LOL. That is also the risk of doing stupid but so exciting things, I know and accept it. Or you stay in house playing on the computer, but beware of the peanuts.
An accident like entering too fast in a curve on a motorcycle...mistake of the pilot. And the well engineered motorcycle is transformed in wreck in 2 seconds.

 

[powerabout]

how come arma's dont have lifting strakes like powerboats now that they go the same speed?
We have single chines on keel boats now

 

[Ilan Voyager]

Strange that Hydroptere has been successful with old fashioned surface piercing foils designed decades ago? Sure they have been refined - but still the original basic design.
18 m Paragon in her day thrashed all the French 25 m maxi catamarans at ... La Trinite I think it was, large race gathering of multihulls anyway.
Sure, foils have been around since before Paul Ricard but Rob James was still being avant garde with alterations to Colt Cars. And what is wrong with improving flawed desighs with their additions?
Certainly foil design and development has improved - but in reality they are at base, what began way back with Williwaw - that is angles and Vs. Plus ca change etc.

Hydroptere spent years eating money with no results. More than 8 millions euros, at least three sponsors gave up...The profile of foil of the record was rather innovative...The problem is that profile works only in very small range. Good for a badly needed record for finding money. Luck to have the perfect conditions of wind and sea. And intelligent enough to have used all this elements, have taken the risk, and got the record. No hope on an oceanic boat. Most of the good foils on sail boats now are piercing, these foils need ventilation to work properly.
Paragon could be fast, but was very irregular. If the conditions were optimal it was a fast dog. If the conditions were not optimal, it looked like a dog being pulled by the leash under the rain to the veterinarian office for the annual shots. A lot of names of sponsors, many people skipped it, not a lot of good results. There is something rather mysterious. Like always the Irens tris were better all around. In 1988 with new generation of tris by Irens, Paragon only 3 years old was out of race; he arrived 7th of the Ostar, 3 days after the winner. The evolution was fast... Remain that this tri is elegant. I believe it's in NZ now.

Rob James was in the good trend of the time, unhappily the Holland design was a lemon and he had to do with it. A skipper can't say or write that a boat is a piece of s..... and sponsors are rare beasts in UK. James would have done a lot more with a good boat.

Using foils trying to improve a flawed design is a dangerous path, the engineering logic seems to me weird. It's better and safer to use foils to improve an good design.
Foils were (and remain fragile) if it breaks you have to keep a good safe boat, even without foils.
Foils can misbehave, I can say that a foil going negative is a surprising experience, you need a good boat...So imagine a foil which breaks or go negative on a unsafe flawed design. Bingo, you got the price of the most artistic capsize.

 

[Ilan Voyager]

how come arma's dont have lifting strakes like powerboats now that they go the same speed?
We have single chines on keel boats now

That have been tried several times on small and big multis.
One Swiss sport catamaran about 10 years ago. No good results.
A 60 feet catamaran all carbon with twin masts by Yves Parlier, the hydraplaneur in 2002. Very fast in the good conditions (598 NM/24 hours) but not good all around. It was a brutal pounder.
Multis have to sail in a lot of conditions of sea and wind. The strakes cost too much in terms of drag most of the time and can be harsh. An better all around results are obtained with the actual shapes. Now with the new generation of foils, strakes are out.
The chine on the monohulls has a very different purpose.

 

[cavalier mk2]

Hey Ilan you seem pretty objective. This design came up a few days ago on the F-40 thread, excuse the battered drawing. This Newick features his new moon amas which develop some dynamic lift while reducing leeway so less daggerboard can be used on reaches. It also featured foils which are not shown. It was designed as a fast cruiser, several have been built with no crashes yet. What do you think? His 23 foot Tremelino had 3 ama options, the infamous hobie 16, a larger conventional rounded v ama and a new moon ama similar to these. Speeds went up accordingly, 16-17 for the hobie and 23+ for the new moon. Reviewers didn't manage to crash it.