Heavy sailboats : Can they point ?

LDA;

You accuse ME of having bad manners, when YOU called ME a fraud. That was the first time either of us had said anything insulting (apart perhaps from your reference to "toy" boats and then your insinuation that I and the extremely experienced sailors I have interviewed and identified were less experienced that you (not that you have given any idea of what you sail and when). You called me a fraud just because you had preconceptions about IRC and you then failed to read the rules properly. You not only accused me of fraud when I said that a new hull could get some IRC age allowance, you even implied everyone outside Europe was dishonest. And yet you have the gall to speak as if I was being insulting!

You then speak of IRM as if it was the same as IRC. It is NOT. IRC is designed to cater for most boats, IRC is specifically a type-formed rule for development boats. They are quite different in the way they approach age allowance and anyone who has done research on IRC and IRM knows this.

My information on IRC age allowance and IRM comes from emails and telephone conversations to people such as Mike Unwin who runs the RORC rating office, a member of the committee of the Offshore Racing Council, and the Australian IRC co-ordinator, while preparing articles. I am quite correct and I have given references, down to the page, of my information. My information on IRC age allowance was read and cleared by the two people mentioned above. I don't care what you think about IRC, based on another rule. I have checked my facts with one of the highest people in IRC and IRC.

You, on the other hand, have conducted a vicious smear campaign based on nothing but your unresearched views.

I must say, I find it bizarre that I am accused of fraudulence, bad manners and dishonesty when YOU have failed to read the rules or to do your research. YOU were the one to start the insults, yet I am accused of having poor manners.

I assume that the rest of your "knowledge" is of similar quality. I shall no longer bother to reply to your insults or your poorly-researched insinuations.

 

colin archer

Even though the colin archers "Sköyters" were not thought for speed, they had won some races.

But en any case, one of them "Sköyters" or their copies are what the doctor recomends for staying healthy at sea. Did you ever hear " on a slow boat to china"?

You are more than right, when you said that they were build for saving lives.

The first sköyte out, the RS (nr. 1) "Colin Archer" in her very first rescue action, went out in a bad storm. The sköyte and her crew rescued several fishing boats, a good number of people, etc. (check her history) in order to approach the rescued vessels, the sköyte had to sail all around the the wind rose, including pointing, os as the Norwegian say: bidevind. Remember, no motor and no radar, just good seamanship on the part of the skiper and crew, and good sailing qualities of the sköyter.

The modern boats may point higher, although the sköyter don't do so bad if they are propperly rigg, and when pointing, tthe gaf is almost vertical and as parallel to the mast as you can make it. There are some other tricks, but then you need to play around on a sköyte in order to discover them.

Viva el sköite!

José



Please, dont take in account my misspeling. Englis is not my every day language (not even my every week language)

 

I must say, that I have a deep love for the Colin Archer type; Even the Westsail 32 the Ingrid and Venus designs. I love the way that she bobs her head, (I think the waterplane loading decreases moving from aft forward.) When they are set up they move very nicely to windward, and not on their ear. I like the way the hull loads up when she works to windward, no great hollow chasam on the windward side, lots of foam to leeward, and who doesn't like to splash in the waves? I wish that there was more of them here on the Pacific North West. Now if I have skimmed through the last seven pages I think the discussion is about new versus old designs going to windward. I don't rcall anyone mentioning that to go to windward your waterline length shoud not infavourably match the local wave conditions as to period of encounter, you see you get syncrounous pitching something Archers have been accused of because they don't have a fat *** to dampen pitching (When those fat sterns are dampening pitching they are spanking like you would not care to experience) No one mentioned waterline length, Out here in the cold rain forest , where no one sails their boats they just motor with propellors that are 20-25 % eff. The unknowing would ask why? Because you can't sail to windward! If you don't believe me a very crude explanation would have to be, That in a narrow straight of water the wind develops a surface current combined with short tacks double waves (from reflection from the cliff faces) that real VMG's are not often measurable hell I will admit it they are negative velocities, unless of course you have considerable power to carry sail, to carry momentum through the tacking maneuver (Remember the reflected chop.) The surface current and something like a VMG of 5 knots pinching up hard. Yes I know I am wrong, but then I have spent a whole day tacking back and forth trying to clear a point of land. Schooner

 

I have been aboard a Colin Archer type yacht that was unable to tack into a bay after the engine failed and we spent the next two days hove to in the ensuing storm and slid many miles offshore , in that same time the racing fleet reaching up the coast to a man dropped their sails and motored in for shelter as we would have done if we'd had the chance. It was the sea that killed us and the racing yachts too the vessel was happy to point resonably for windward ability but her bows were too bluff to slice the seas. But I was happy to be aboard that heavy hull at other times and in 8 months in the Med the engine failed us only once.

Many modern heavy displacement boats like Ted Brewers have much narrower bows and much better to work to windward in a big sea.

 

Most "heavy" boats one would think of would have a wide beam. If the boat is narrow and deep, and carries enough sail to power the hull, it will go to weather fine. As someone said earlier in this thread, IACCs are heavy. They arent exactly heavy, but they are starting to be heavier than new designs, as the rule they are designed to is becoming somewhat obsolete. Also, J-Class Ranger was 166 tons and could go quite well to weather. I used to sail on a fat 35 ton centreboard yawl that was 60 feet long and weighed 35 tons, and we could go to weather pointing between 40 and 45 degrees off the wind.

 

I don't understand why people keep saying ACC boats are "heavy". They are lighter for their length (lower DLR) than things like Melges 24s and other sportboats.

OK, so there are now maybe 10 other boats in the world at this size that are lighter, mostly using canting keels. But compared to most monohull raceboats of the past 10 years, IMS and now IRC, the ACC boats are extreme lightweights.

Of course the Open 60s and now Open 70s are lighter still, but the 60s don't go upwind all that well compared to inshore racers.

 

Forget all the technical stuff that causes differences of opinion gentleman

The topic is "Heavy sailboats: can they point?"
My humble answer is yes, some do and no, others do not. It is all about design and seamanship.
At the end I think, it all boils down to the overall sailing experience from point A to point B.
Sometimes heavy sailboats are faster over an extended cruise that their lighter siblings and without question more comfortable.

 

I did not write the "spoof "

Thanks so much for the evenings entertainment Gentlemen [ that's assuming you didn't write the spoof your self Auzzi Chris ]
I had a great laugh !!, tears in me eyes in fact.
I spent around 4 years living in the land of Aus-, having converted a bus to a home, we Kiwi's [ wife & 3 kids ] traveled right around the coast --- great experience, great people -- most Ausies, that is.
When I finnish our yacht, we intend doing the watery version.
I said that to say, I had no Idea you Ausi's were so sensitive !!, in fact, I've never heard one so sensitive !![ glad I can't hear the accent , it'd sound even more whinging than it normally would ]. What you Yanks need to understand is that the Ausie's are all from criminal backgrounds, so "UNDERHAND" [ some may call it cheating ] comes naturally to them.[ they're not to bad at cricket either ]
You don't get it do you mate, the clever fella just shuts up & thinks, yeah whatever mate !.
If I had to choose, if it made you feel better, my logic says we've progressed & todays boats are safer etc, but spare us the details of your trophy cabinet Chris - OHH Ahh !
I'm a sick barstard, OK, call me sick, but I love good [ is there such a thing ] sarchasim
Now whether you pretended to be you [ in order to be able to get self righteous - which you did so well ] or some other sick barstard [ see above sick barstard ] pretended to be you is irrelevant, the great thing is it was great reading, I think I even enjoyed the bit about boats.
Please excuse my frequent use of the word " barstard", it was to make our Austrailian guest feel welcome as it's a popular word there, & the country's full of them !
Proud Kiwi [ that's right Ausie, a sheep shagger ! ha ha ]

 

Yes, I did get too upset when ldf started slagging me off....I can't delete the posts but I've asked the forum to delete some of them for me.

Maybe one day I'll be wise and perfect like you are

 

Now now, there you go again, don't be so sensitive, looooosen up mate !!.
Glad to see you've now become a member, we [ listen to me!, I'm new too.] need a broad range of characters , especially with huge experience such as yours.
Clowns like me, who can't help joking about some things that are obviously serious to others, can't help but respect your yachting achivements.
So I for one, would value your point of view. But if you bite like a great white to someone's -- what shall we call it ? -- emotional opinion, maaaate, you're fair game !!
Great to see your quick reply to my tounge & two feet in mouth reply to your " discussion" .
At the risk of being seen to defend myself [ heaven forbid ] I'm far from "wise", more like an opiniated clown , and as to being "perfect", the only one who thinks that is my 3 year old daughter -- & even she thinks my ears are far too hairy & my tummys too fat.
Sorry to those members who've got annoyed I haven't been talking boats, but a good laugh is like good medicine eh ! [ oh, you're annoyed, so it's not funny ]

 

I think it's something about the internet; real life is much less aggro, and you're less likely to make insults or take a stand against them.