Westlawn & Cruising World Announce a New Design Competition

well done Mark, any chance posting some pics here so we can we see it too?

 

One Day Timeframe

With that short of a timeframe, did you have trouble with the 1000 word write up??

That sure took me time to condense mine. Of course I can get too wordy at times.

This was quite a surprise to me as well, considering the huge amount of space in Cruising World magazine being devoted to multihulls these days. ...And the very considerable praise being given them by their cruising staff. (I guess these folks weren't in on the judging though)

What little I saw of your design reminded me a bit of Lock Crowthers work. Do I imagine you were influenced by him ??

 

I finally got a chance to review the finalist in the Westlawn/Cruising World Design Contest. I was a little put off by some of the comments that I read by various judges. Not that they were necessarily mean spirited, but the comments seemed contradictory, and not in keeping with the purpose of the contest. According to the site:

I don’t want to second guess the experts here, at least not in a disrespectful manner, but I have some reservations about their decisions. The winning entry has a 32 gallon water tank; and 22 gal fuel tank, that just doesn’t strike me as sufficient for “serious cruising”.

The following comment was made about the second runner up Bisol's Deep Blue 48:

Deep Blue 48 has a displacement of 20,286 lb. (9,200 kg.) for a B/D of .3 and D/L of 104 Are they aware that their first place boat only weighs 9,351 lb. (4,241 kg.) with B/D .4 considering the mast heights, and beam of the 2 boats, I think their comments are dubious at best. Judging by other comments they have made the panel puts a heavy emphesis on comfort at sea; yet the first place boat is going to be a cork tossed in the wind in any kind of a blow.

A comment was made by Bob Johnson of the first runner up.

The design criteria in the rules specifically stated between 30 and 65 feet; expense was not listed as part of the judging criteria.

I think it’s the comments about Eric Sponbergs Eagle I find the most troubling.

Owners of wishbone masts say they are easier to handle than conventional rigs. As far as the comment about the windage in heavy weather, am I missing something? A rotating wing mast has the ability to sail under bare poles. The extremely high aspect ratio of a wing mast with no soft sail attached provides necessary driving force with the least amount of healing force. Windage at anchor could be a problem, but I would think that allowing the masts to weather vane would minimize this. I think the final comment about Eric’s boat kind of sums it up:

In the end, the panel was not really impressed by “new and exciting designs” Instead they chose a cork bobbing lead sled without enough tankage to last the mandatory 3 week cruise in the design brief built out of all things, wood laptrake. They seemed enamored with the idea of CNC cut /computer generated panels; a technology that is over 2 decades old.

 

It’s always good to get thoughtful comments such as Man Overboard’s. It isn’t possible, though, to further explain the judges' reasoning (all from their own very different individual perspectives). I can tell you it was extremely difficult to evaluate 53 designs, each of which had so much thought put into them. Several had some really radical and promising features, but—unfortunately—most of these designs also had some serious flaw.

Keep in mind, the judges were some of the most experienced designers anywhere. They represented together well over 250 years of design and sailing experience. Though I may not have agreed with the details of all the other judges evaluations, I certainly consider their opinions highly valuable and well reasoned, and would disregard them only with great reluctance. Of course, all the judges didn’t agree on everything and neither should you. That’s what forums and open discussion are for. Keep the thoughts and comments coming.

Man Overboard does seems to be under a misconception, however. It’s possible that the quote he gives that the purpose of the competition was, “to encourage and highlight new and exciting designs for serious cruising under sail,” came from some later less-accurate recap of the competition, but the competition judging standards and goals were stated in the entry rules posted for the design competition and also posted here on boatdesign.net. They were:

Note that all criteria have equal weight and that “new and exciting”—innovation in and of itself—though part of the criteria, is only one small part.

We are considering holding another design competition in the next year or so. It might well be a powerboat design next go 'round to keep things varied. Stay tuned.

Dave Gerr
Director
Westlawn Institute of Marine Technology
www.westlawn.edu

 

Dave,

I would like to thank you for your reply, and also for your participation on this forum.

You are correct about the quote I gave; it appears in the beginning paragraph of the article entitled:

2007 Westlawn/ Island Packet Yachts Design Competition: Results Overview

You will notice that in that article the statement appears in quotes; it appeared originally in the 'contest rules of entry' page in the first paragraph:

Ref:
http://www.cruisingworld.com/article.jsp?ID=43520&typeID=393&catID=559

I, in no way, mean to ruffle the feathers of such a distinguished member of this forum, and am appreciative of your participation. In reviewing the judge’s comments, I weighed them against the purpose statement given in the competition rules synopsis. As you have stated, the judges come from a background of considerable experience; yet some of their statements seem to be inconsistent with what we are seeing develop in the cruising scene today. As a student of yacht architecture and design, I look to those with experience to quantify, and to justify their opinions; not to be brash, but rather to get a handle on the often times divergent views of the experts. If I expect to be successful in my own designs, I need to be able to assimilate the various expert views into quantifiable and repeatable formulas that can accurately predict yacht motion, performance and behavior.

 

Bravo, Mr Man Overboard

I repeat the words from the very first posting on this forum subject thread submitted by Mr Gerr, "Its purpose is to encourage and highlight new and exciting designs for serious cruising under sail". Maybe he is saying he did not write these words, but they appear in his posting as though it is a goal of the contest. Maybe I read too much into this statement, but it sure appeared to me they were looking for "new and exciting", in addition to all of the normal things one would consider in designing a sailing craft. From what little I've seen of the entries I don't believe a full 50% of the winners could be considered 'new and exciting'.

Regrettably I have been ignored in my call for the other entries to be published, and/or for those persons to be notified of this forum subject such that we might see some of their entries. I had posted previously, "I think it would be interesting to view ALL of the submissions (53 total I believe). There might be some other 'dark horses' in there that never see the light of day. Maybe that would excite the readers to a higher voting turnout. Or maybe some other interesting ideas would surface that got lost in the shuffle.".

When I first saw your posting I was going to reply 'bravo' right away, but I thought it would be better to see what other replies came in first. You appear to have read what little info they chose to publish with a thoroughness, and picked out a few disturbing judgements I detected also. It harkens back to that extremely conservative thinking in the USA sailing community/industry I ran into when I got involved with multihull sailboats back in the early 70's. (the CEO from RubberMaid corp expressed it so interestingly when he described the colors of kitchen products from his company that sold well in the USA....black, beige, and white. When ask what all of the other bright colors were for...."Europe and the rest of the world")

This leaves the impression that all of the judges reviewed all of the designs. I don't believe this was the case??
I believe a great many of the submissions were whittled out by only 3 persons, and then that remaining group of 10-12 were put before the other judges. So, many of the designs were never seen by the majority of the judges. Is that so??

Sounds similar in tone to many the critizisms that preceeded the new Maltese Falcon yacht....which is certainly new and exciting to the sailing world.

There were more than several references to a design being too expensive. I don't recall ANYTHING about the price being a consideration in this contest submission.

Finally I don't believe the goal of such a contest should be to consider only 'flawless' designs, (nor, only professionally correct designs), but rather creativity to bring forward new ideas....not just rehash old ones.

 

The problem I think we are seeing is the commercial realities of the magazines need for a broad-brush approach in order to attracted as many entries as possible to satisfy their readerships different tastes. Although this approach gives full scope for a wide variety of designs it seems, as it turned out, a little at odds with the somewhat narrower definitions, thoughts and design philosophes of the judging panel. Maybe in the future a more focused design brief would be better.

 

public relations

who am i to question procedures but since i now feel beeing spoken to
i recall mentioning in my brief mine was a concept design under study

a simple e-mail with a link for seeing the rest or jury findings in this competition
or a thank you for entering would have been the least i was expecting...

than again i'm a designer and sucker for boats and like powerboats as well...

 

I've only just discovered this thread, which is shame because it is what BoatDesign is all about! Great stuff.

 

Man Overboard, Brian, and others--
I appreciate your support, and I am happy about the public response to my design Eagle. I, too, was a little taken aback at some of the comments by the judging committee, but in these kinds of competitions, that is to be expected. I am happy to have made the top ten out of 55 from around the world.

I attach the Mission Statement that I wrote for the competition so that you may see how I presented the design. Besides the drawings, I also presented a weight summary, hydrostatics and stability calculations, a STIX calculation, 3-D renderings, and some photos of mast bearings, mast & stubmast assembly, and bending tests on the new carbon fiber wingmast for my new sailboat design Saint Barbara which will be launched next spring.

In the Mission Statement, I address the issue of anchoring a boat with wingmasts, to quote:

Finally, what to do about all that sail area in the wingmasts when at an anchorage or at a dock—not a problem. Simply set the main mast angle 45º one way and the mizzen mast 45º the other way. The boat sits dead in the water and does not move—it’s remarkable how it works. In fact, it will probably be more stable than other boats in the harbor.

This characteristic comes from both my first-hand experience and second-hand accounts of people who have owned wingmasted boats. There are precious few of them, but their owners are devoted to their boats, because they work. You do not want to let the mast or masts weathervane. They will start to oscillate side to one side, back and forth, which then sets the boat to rolling as the masts cause lift one way and the other. In one instance, an owner of a wingmasted sloop said the rolling got so bad that the boat almost capsized right at the mooring. You want to keep the masts tied down and not allow them to move at anchor. This keeps the boat absolutely still.

I would like to repeat my Mission from the Mission Statement, and also the design summary:

THE MISSION:
Design a sailing yacht to carry a crew of two to four persons on transoceanic voyages. Safety and performance are to be consistent with an overall size of yacht that is capable, comfortable, easy to handle, and affordable.

I think my design documents showed this very well. I tried to present design information and data that addressed all aspects of using the boat in the way it is intended. It is a very practical design. And yes, I did not get at all how the judges could say that the wingmasts with their half wishbones "add a level of complexity...above the comfort level of most cruisers." Excuse me?? A major part of the presentation pointed to the fact that the wingmast rig is simpler, safer, easier to sail, and more reliable than a conventional rig with its myriad parts and potential failure points. Is this rig not proven??? Not at all. It has been proven sufficiently many, many times to work as stated.

Aside from being scaredy cats, in my opinion, and not wanting to commit to true innovation as evidenced by their final selectinos, the judges did say my presentation was "utterly professional." I thank them for that.

The summary:

SUMMARY--FUNCTION WITH FORM:
Eagle and her crew will function well both at sea and in an isolated anchorage. Most of these features are fairly traditional because they have been proven to work well. The rig is innovative but relies on proven technology. Eagle combines these elements into a very practical whole. At the same time, the proportions and shape of the yacht are aesthetically attractive, which, like her namesake, give her dignity and grace.

Thanks again for everyone's support.

Eric

 

This all rather reminds me of the judges at an Olympic figure-skating event. Everyone knows they’re always wrong. I guess the biblical saying is right:

“Judge not, lest ye be judged.”

Regardless, it really was a pleasure to get to look over all the many excellent design submissions for the contest, especially those in the top 10 or 15 like Eric Sponberg’s. All were really fine work.

This is a great thread. It’s what boatdesign.net is all about. Keep the comments coming!

Dave Gerr
Director
Westlawn Institute of Marine Technology
www.westlawn.edu

 

you 'll do better next time!!!!!!!

Dear Mr Gerr,

When will you lauch the next contest ?

Best regards,

JD

 

OceanSky 57 catamaran

After reading this thread several times , I decided to post my description of the Oceansky 57- the only multihull to make it into the top 10. The design itself, was originally thought of 2 years ago which was based on our own experiences of living aboard a cat for 11 years, cruising Australia and offshore through the Asia/ Pacific region.
Crossing the equator on numerous occassions, where the wind is light and variable, I wanted a boat which would sail comfortably and with speed through this region. It also had to have max freeboard under the bridgedek area for example, the distance between the crossbeams and the DWL is 5 ft. The control or helmstation had to have maximum all round vision and all controls leading to one point for max safety and control. Being that the nature of the boat is for fast passages, all aspects of this design have been designed with this in mind.
Cats in general, now are becoming larger and more "houseboat" like. Being of such a large volume, people tend to try and fit "everything" that a normal house would have. This tends to make the boats heavy, for their nature, to the point now where normal mono's are surpassing them. Only 2 weeks ago we delivered a 34 ft catamaran for a client on a passage of 900nm. One leg entailed a windward passage of 140nm. During this leg a little 28 ft mono ( cruiser) caught us, eased his sheets, had a chat, then sheeted in and left us in his wake. The current trend of cat are great for downwind and reaching, but with the current trend , they're a waste of time for windward work. WHY. Because they're just to heavy. If one gets back to what cats are good for and design them as much ( in other words keep them light and slick) then for windward work, they can go like rockets.
That is what this boat was designed for- carry the essentials and and just go.

Regards Mark Bowdidge (ARINA)

 

Nice looking boat. But what about the interior space? There are no drawings?

 

dgerr,
i dont like the cold and cant skate but do some aprox figures, much rather being judged than judge, well said

Vega,
looks like a centerpod and at 57ft guess Oceansky has planty room for essentials

Mark Bowdidge,
nice to read and see, sharp boat you drew. reading wharram who rather lived -long time too- in the hulls,
overloading can cost 1/3 in speed witch is today easely checked in mitchlet and kaper
speed i agree is the major virtue of a cat and sure would be nice to just stay ahead of most mono's
in a motorsailing houseboat and weight does dampen slamming and jerking, ads stability etc
all theory and still looking fwd sailing a big cat for real