TP52s

Frank, glad to see you back. I must say however, that I was hoping you would have answered my questions from my last post. I was asking seriously about the TP 52's and what seems to be your anger against them. Why not just let the rich go on and sail what they want? I also was very interested in your take on the deaths from a Mac?

I'm not trying to diss you but am actually inquiring and asking questions. It's hard when you blow by talking about pumpkins! What's with that?!

 

Quick question, Frank. What features do you consider essential for a transoceanic racing or cruising yacht? Safety features, hull design etc.

And one more: If you had $20,000 and could purchase any production vessel aside from vessels produced by MacGregor, what would you purchase? Why, in terms of boat design (stability, seaworthiness etc.)?

 

Boat design rocks. Look at all this activity. A safe harbor for those of us who just do not believe the melt down now ocuring in the US Bush administration. Argh - the truth hurts. No wonder the world hates us. So keep me sain. Lets chat boating.

John Vigor, a reviewer of "good old boats" in Twenty Small Sailboats to Take You Anywhere (1999 Paradise Cay Publications) lists the Alberg 30, Albin Vega 27, Allied Seawind 32, Bristol 27, Bristol Channel Cutter 28, Cal 20, Cape Dory 25D, Catalina 27, Contessa/J.J Taylor 26, Contessa 32, Dana 24, Falmouth Cutter 22, Flicka 20, Folkboat 25, Frances/Morris 26, Nicholson 31, Pacific Seacraft 25, Person Triton 28, Sothern Cross 31 and Westsail 32s as blue water cruisers/ pocket cruisers. To this list add Etap 26i. If one accepts this list, as I do, it is hard to doubt that the Mac26x qualifies as a true blue water pocket cruiser.

British naval architects established in the 1950s that the smallest practical ocean cruiser in the modern age is a bit less than 20 feet. All the provisions necessary can be stowed for comfortably and safely circumnavigating the globe in 20 to 30 footers and there are super markets at the remotest of ports of call. The historical record is full of examples of those who have done so (Trekka, Flicka, Kawabunga, Alsvid, Dove, and Varuna for example.)

The literature makes ocean cruising appear more dangerous than mountain downhill skiing or river rafting. One theory is that those who circumnavigate in a 30 foot or smaller ocean cruiser without a life threatening story to tell simply do not get the experience in print. I have been told that ocean racing rules perpetuate the notion that vessels under 60 feet are somehow undesirable.

There is the fear of capsizing, to be considered. Sail boat owners have been known to put tons of lead pellets, (several hundred pounds of sand mixed in rezen) or 4 times the needed water and canned goods and anchor tackle, in bilges because of the fear of capsizing.

The TP52 fits into this class. 20,000 gets you a lot of used boat these days. Lets Rock this place tonight eh?

Frank Mighetto
Member SSSS

 

In early 2005 it became obvious that IRC would be the new standard for ocean racing in the US. IRC is capable of applying a rating to any mono-hull yacht. In doing so, it respects such features as asymmetric spinnakers, carbon masts, canting keels, and water ballast. The story of IRC racing involves the Mac26x. It appears that objections raised during a July 2002 drunken boater's case by Jim Teeters were similar to those the US Sailing technical advisor to the grand prix RWP (Rule Working Party) (also Jim Teeters) hoped would forstall or prevent adoption of the movable ballast and retractable fin tolerant IRC. IRC is only seven years old but its adoption on a world wide basis for rating ocean racing sailboats has been nothing less then phenominal. During the next 10 years the greatest advancement in monohull sailing machine technology of all time is expected and hence there is great interest in rating mechanisms that can handle modern designs. As of March 2005 there had been only one IRC event in the USA but almost all ocean racing bodies had adopted this standard. US Sailing reluctantly began to support IRC and already J24s J80s and Melges24 as well as over 100 other classes of boats have been rated. For questions and the first IRC races in Puget sound contact kurt@mistychula.net. The Corinthian Yacht Club of Seattle wias the first in Puget Sound to support the new ratings and just completed a race.

By way of background, Jim Teeters, in a move that halted progress in movable ballast production designs in the USA, inappropriately testified in the drunken boater's case.

The judge and jury in the case wondered why he even bothered to come to court when the death of two children on a MacGregor 26x on July 4th 2002 appeared to all, including the parents of the children, to be related to drinking by the operator. The case was recently concluded with the operator getting 7 years or so jail time. The boat was never on trial but owing to Jim Teeters' involvement, and his prominant roll on commitees at US Sailing, it is likely that MacGregor yachts halted production of the Mac26x, for business insurance cost reasons.

Production has apparently started back up in Australia and I would like it to proceed again in the US. There are 5000 of these boats world wide and they are the most extensively studied and operated movable balasted vessels in the world because of those numbers. The movement is simply on or off the boat. There is no side to side or forward aft movement. Just on and off, operated fully loaded with ballast or fully unloaded under sail or under power.

Jim Teeters attempted to show a stability design flaw by use of a video. His purpose for doing so appears related to support of the TP52 box rules and IMS, the rating system that has been all but replaced by IRC. That is my theory on his going out of the way to be involved in the case in some manner.

He impeached himself (or convienently changed his mind) by first stating in a deposition that alcohol could have been a contributing factor and then later saying it had nothing to do with the capsize. Had he stuck with his opinion from the deposition, it is unlikly he would have been allowed to testify because the boat was otherwise not on trial. A fellow named Taylor disagreed with Teeters, testifying that there is no design flaw and the boat can be operated safely, and Taylor's expert witness testimony basically devastated the principles Teeters has supported. What is most interesting is that I suspect Teeters' court involvement was not against MacGregor Yachts specifically as much as it was to support TP52s and forstall IRC in the US. The box rules for the TP52s also included plans for smaller ocean racers of Mac26x size.

Basically, Teeters likely hoped that a limit of positive stability of 128 determined by mathematics, would be established for future ocean racing designs. The RWP, wishing to encourage movable ballast ocean racing designs, rejected this principle, which I call the Teeter Principle, in part because no vessel with a limit of positive stability of 110 can be knocked down by wind alone.

Of course all vessels in sufficient sea can capsize but the RWP decided that it was the design's ability to be righted - tested via a test pool - that was most important and not the math. Thousands of these Mac26x vessels in operation for half a decade didn't really support Teeters in his arguments for 128 stability and support of the TP52 box rules. The racing potential for the X cruisers is also of concern to who those would like to be viewed as experts in sailboat design, and develop a 26 foot racer using the TP52 like box rules.

In a move that shocked no one, because it protected significant vested interests, Jim Teeters, in his capacity as technical consultant to US Sailing's delegation to the RWP, orchestrated the US Sailing delegation's walk out from the RWP.

He then founded ORCA in May of 2004 which I believe to be an organization that is as close to fraudulent as you can get because the ORCA name is a name known in ocean racing since the 1970s but that organization has not operated for many years. Hence prospects for TP52s think the design has the blessings of a well established and reputable organization when the current ORCA is recently established and of questionable reputation.

US Sailing coincidentally reorganized Jim Teeters out of his director of research position, or Teeters resigned possibly after being asked to, but in any case the situation is that now US Sailing has no representation on the RWP and the only vessel supported by ORCA is the TP52s which are being marketed as TransPacific vessels in spite of the first five being designed specifically for Atlantic Waters.

The TP52s are claimed to be the fastest growing ocean racing design but there will still be under 20 of them by the end of 2005. This is after 15 years of effort because the concept boat for the TP52 is the Santa Cruise 52. Santa Cruise Yachts went bankrupt during the launch of the SC52 and it took 10 years of regrouping before the first TP52s were launched. Even if you view the TP52 as having but a 5 year production span, the model is now in its fourth generation. The concepts for the TP52 are literally 15 years behind modern monohull technology. Hence new "generations" are launched almost yearly. The new generation obsoletes the old ones which get retired making these vessels the most foolish of all from a financial risk perspective. The stability requirement of 128 has harmed them on the Vic Maui race but not the West Marine TransPac Fun race where water ballasted vessels of greater than 24 foot such as the Mac26x are allowed to enter.

In the March 2005 Seahorse International Sailing, Teeters finally addressed the critisism above. In his letter on page 32 he attemps to justify the Teeter Principle by pointing out that yet another new offshore organization has proposed a suite of box rules similar to ORCA's TP52 rules. Seahorse makes fun of Teeters through out the issue. First there is an article about change on page 45 where Dave Hoolom states that historically "to be a proper yachting authority you have to have your own rating rule" like the TP rules. Teeters clearly wants to be viewed as a yachting authority. He still is on US Sailing's IMS commitee, a committee that oversees now less than 5 races yearly since all the previously IMS races have gone IRC. Second they caption Teeters letter on page 32 with "In defense of orcas..." And third they describe on page 12 the provisional outline for the ORC (Offshore Racing Council) box rules that replace what Teeters supports through ORCA, even providing 26, 32 and 42 foot illustrations, and discussing the significant investment that should be viewed as sunk and lost forever TP52 development costs. Janet Baxter, president of US Sailing is even quoted "I have heard that ORC is considering the box rule concept we proposed a year ago. We were not (at that time) willing to develop a new grand prix rule without including the TP52 class and it looks like our friends (ORC) have heard us" by coming up with a replacement similar set of box rules for those who ignore IRC.
It is important to note that ORC was created at the end of 2002. It is a spin off of US Sailing that is now a separate organization with a representative on the US Sailing Offshore Committee that continues to maintain and manage the IMS rules as well as new ORC rules. This spin off was likely necessary for US Sailing to continue in its role as national authority in the US on the International Sailing Federation (ISAF) Racing Rules of Sailing.

Simply stated, US Sailing in 2002 appeared biased against retractable foils and water and canting ballast even though ISAF, had altered racing rules 51 and 52 in 1997 to permit moveable ballast and stored energy. And Jim Teeters prominant position in the US sailing organization made it appear that US Sailing was using its influence, in US courts, rating organizations, and sailing clubs, to promote heavy fixed fin vessels. Such support appeared to include but was not limited to the promotion of windward leeward courses in spite of a predominance of ISAF rules and examples involving courses that also have reaching legs and are favored by crews of the modern design high performance vessels.

ISAF rules regarding biased judgment such as the above made US Sailing appear inappropriate as the final adjudicator of ISAF rules because after 7 years it appeared unwilling to support the altered rules 51 and 52. It is to Janet Baxter's credit that the significant changes made at US Sailing at the 2004 Pacific Northwest Board Meetings were implemented to eliminate the top down decision making preventing the organization from supporting movable ballast and retracting foils. The biases and material weakness in the financial dealings of US Sailing may have been significantly lessoned so that it can continue in its role as national authority to ISAF.

Pumkins are a traditional holloween carving activity. Carving is of course a sailor's activity and unfortunately the pumkins did not arrive owing to their transport on a racer that probably sould have been retired 10 years ago. The South Puget Sound is not a dumping ground for old race boats. If they are to be welcomed they must serve capably.

Huzah Huzah To those of you who read all of this.

Frank L. Mighetto
Member US Sailing

 

Who are you? Argh. Listen to the Canadian. The US american dream up until just today was to amass enough wealth to move out of the USA. I was thinking Italy myself. Argh! Have you seen what the Bush Administration has done to this country. Tourture chambers similar to the crusades for any who might disagree? I can not tolerate that news. Who was that brave lass who called Bush a *****. I believe she lost her Canadian post because of that. I was even perplexed. She is a hero today. Lets chat boating. Lets recognize that things are proceding acording to the way mighetto thinks they should, and the Canadian's think they should BTW.

In the civilization of boating we have those who support Sudie Parker and those who do not. Or you can say we have those that support the boats for fools and those who do not. I preach specifically about a comparison of 48 North, a publication long the beacon of those who think of sailing like the Canadian hero J. Slocum, and Northwest Yachting Magazine.

In the later case you have a well writen article that advaces sailing specifically mentioning IRC and how the TP52 Braveheart has converted. Can an IRC boat be a TP52? For that matter can any boat named Braveheart be associated with an owner-driver class? Lets recognize that Braveheart has never been a TP52. She is pure, a boat worthy of following, and meant from the start to be a bouy racer. See the article by Tom Rutten. 100 Boats Show up for Great Racing at PSSC.

Now see the pathetic leter to the editor about the gal who is a racer and should be writing instead of those who wrote truth about Swiftsure. This is in 48 north. Manchester's article was outstanding. Lee Scott must be someone whose balls the sea hag has collected. So sad he claims to be a Canadian. How wonderful the Edior's letter "Of course you can't keep that killjoy Bottom Line from crashing the party.." Sea Gal - take up golf - your article on the same PSSC race in 48 north doesn't mention IRC and is hardly readable. I take it your Tripp 47 is up for sale. Lovely vessel? She hardy operates under sail or power.

I am getting off my soap box now. Does anyone wish to preach? The Church of FOYD remains open. Lets remember - it is not I that sent thugs to the State of Washington and the State Patrol - to shut my posts down. That was Little Man Hansen - husband of Tripp Gal. We do not rest until she is removed as a PHRF rater. If PHRF NW must fail for that to happen. So Be it. SSSS has IRC.

Frank Mighetto
Member SSSS
Member Sailing Anarchy

 

Eventually I will post. I do not yet understand what game you are playing. Right now Seattle's Progressive Internet is being broadcasted by the Port of Olympia’s Internet Connection Service. Crew of the Juvinile Naivite have threatened to have my boat removed from the marina. Such are the ways of lubbers. Fortunately, those in maritime understand. Sudie Parker has offened the mayors of Olympia, Lacy and Tumwater with her deep water port comments after Toliva. So I doubt she has much influence. For reverence these are the rules, I must abide by. Pay particular attention to ************ references. Until SA stops that behavior, I have to post from another provider or risk losing a service I value which is a service that Tripp Gal desires me not to have. Does this make sense? Here is the agreement in total.

While using the Port of Olympia’s Internet Connection Service (the Service), you may not: (a) interfere with any other Member's use of the Service; (b) transmit or make available any Content that is unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, ************, or otherwise objectionable, including without limitation any transmissions or Content constituting or encouraging conduct that would constitute a criminal offense, give rise to civil liability, or otherwise violate any local, state, national or international law; (c) knowingly transmit any information or software which contains a virus or other harmful component; (d) transmit, make available as Content or in any way exploit any information, software or other material obtained through the Service for commercial purposes other than as expressly permitted by the owner of such information; (e) transmit, make available as Content or distribute in any way information, software or other material obtained through the Service which is protected by copyright, or other proprietary right, or derivative works with respect thereto, without obtaining permission of the copyright owner or right holder; (f) "hack" or enter or attempt to gain access to or affect the functioning of any computer without proper authorization; (g) impersonate any person; or (h) supply any inaccurate credit card or other information in connection with purchases on the Internet.

You may not use the Service for the purposes of "spamming" or similar practices, including, but not limited to: (1) sending unsolicited bulk or "junk" e-mail for commercial or other solicitation purposes; or (2) sending chain letters or e-mail in support of pyramid schemes. You may not use the Service to harvest or collect information, including usernames and e-mail addresses, to be used for such purposes.

In addition to other remedies available at law or equity, the Port of Olympia may, immediately and without notice, suspend your access to the Service or terminate your Service if the Port of Olympia, in its sole discretion, determines that your conduct or activities constitute an unacceptable use of the Service. Specifically, for example, the Port of Olympia may terminate your Service for single or repeated violations of prohibitions on copyright infringement. If your Service is terminated because of gross misconduct, the Port of Olympia may make its actions publicly known and you hereby release the Port of Olympia from all claims associated with any such public announcements.

You understand that this Internet connection Service will not be secure and that communications over the Service and the Internet may be subject to interception or loss. You expressly agree that the use of this Service and the Internet is at your sole risk and that this Internet connection Service is provided on an "as is" and "as available" basis. The Port of Olympia reserves the right to discontinue offering this Service, or otherwise modify the terms and conditions for the use of this Service without incurring any liability.

To the maximum extent permitted by law, neither the Port of Olympia nor its telecommunications providers shall be liable for any special, incidental, indirect, punitive or consequential damages arising out of the inability to use the Internet connection Service, use of or inability to access the Internet or any part thereof through the Internet connection Service, or reliance on or use of information, services or merchandise provided on the Internet or through use of the Service, or that result from mistakes, omissions, interruptions, loss of data, errors, defects, delays in operation or transmission, or any failure of performance, or that result from the interception of data or the unauthorized entry into or use of your computer equipment, even if the Port of Olympia or its telecommunications providers have been advised of the possibility of such damages.

You assume total responsibility and risk for your use of the Service and the Internet through the Service. Neither the Port of Olympia nor its telecommunications providers make any express or implied warranties, representations or endorsements whatsoever (including, but not limited to, warranties of title or non-infringement, or implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose) with regard to the Service supplied by the Port of Olympia, or its telecommunications providers (including, but not limited to, virus checking and firewall technology), or any merchandise, information or service provided through the Internet connection Service or on the Internet, and they shall not be liable for any cost or damage arising either directly or indirectly from any such transaction. It is solely your responsibility to evaluate the accuracy, completeness and usefulness of all opinions, advice, services and other information, and the quality and merchantability of all merchandise provided on the Internet. You understand further that the Internet contains materials some of which are sexually explicit or offensive and are unsuitable for minors. You and persons you allow to use your Internet connection access such materials at your own risk. Neither the Port of Olympia nor its telecommunications providers have any control over or accept any responsibility whatsoever for such materials.

You agree to defend, indemnify and hold the Port of Olympia and its affiliates, contractors and telecommunications providers, and the officers, directors, employees and agents of each of them harmless from any and all liabilities, costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, related to any violation of these Terms and Conditions by you or users of your Internet connection, or in connection with the use of the Service or the Internet or the transmission of any message, information, software or other materials using the Service or the Internet by you or users of your Internet connection.

If any part of these Terms and Conditions is held invalid or unenforceable, that portion shall be construed in a manner consistent with applicable law to reflect, as nearly as possible, the original intentions of the parties, and the remaining portions shall remain in full force and effect. The Port of Olympia's failure to insist upon or enforce strict performance of any provision of these Terms and Conditions shall not be construed as a waiver of any provision or right. Neither the course of conduct between the parties nor trade practice shall act to modify any provision of these Terms and Conditions.

The laws of the State of Washington, excluding its conflicts of law rules, govern these Terms and Conditions and your Internet connection. As noted above, your Internet use may be subject to other local, state, national and international laws. You expressly agree that exclusive jurisdiction for any claim or dispute with the Port of Olympia or relating in any way to your use of this Internet connection resides in the courts of Washington State and you further agree and expressly consent to the exercise of personal jurisdiction in the courts of Washington State in connection with any such dispute including any claim involving the Port of Olympia or its affiliates, contractors, telecommunications providers, employees, officers, directors or Content providers.

You agree to abide by U.S. and other applicable export control laws and not to transfer, by electronic transmission or otherwise, any content or software subject to restrictions under such laws to a national destination prohibited under such laws, without first obtaining, and then complying with, any requisite government authorization.

Swantown Marina Wireless Internet Service
Acceptable Use Policy

Get the Tripp Gal legals going. They will be working full time for I do not intend to break these simple rules and the best way of doing so is just not to post on SA. By the way, you do know that those naked women on SA are models paid to show do you not?

Comparing sailboat design to airplane design is the way of Bethwaite and Bolger. They do a wonderful demonstration of the basic principles. You say that airplanes use vertical lift to fly through the air propelled by engines and that Sailboats float at the interface of air and water, propelled by horizontal lift in one medium, using horizontal lift in the other medium to resist sideways forces, and a combination of form and weight distribution to achieve stability. What makes you think there are significant differences between these two systems? Are you too intellectually lazy to look at a sailboard? Do you have a closed mind that prevents you from understanding how their free sails literally lift the craft from the water so they are flying. Are you just busting my chops?

The one word to describe a personality such as mine is Mighty. Test this out yourself. Type mighetto into a computer spell checker such as Word. Get Mighty as a suggested correction.

Reproduce the works of HWNSNBS (Mighty mighetto) on the scuttlebut site? We do battle with Tripp Gal on one front. It is interesting to have but one enemy. Simple really. May the hag find comfort on the golf course. The Church of FOYD is now closed.

 

schizophrenia

 

Braveheart is still a TP52 - she holds a valid class certificate.

The 52's in class trim do well under IRC even wining events and setting records.

The TP52's are not an owner driver class try reading the rule.

Do us all a favor and leave politics out of this thread - they are not part of this lesson.

A tp 52 has nothing other than length in common with the SC52 and there are currently 30+ TP 52's world wide.

The RRS have not been altered try again - lies and more lies.

 

TP 52 Defender

Braveheart is still a TP52 - she holds a valid class certificate.

Does her owner care? I think he is on record as stating he does not. It was in one of the yachting magazines a year or two ago. In the mind of the owner, Braveheart is an IRC racer. Why is his opinion of no importance?

The 52's in class trim do well under IRC even wining events and setting records.

Good for the 52's. However IRC ratings will be adjusted next year. The time for the 52's to shine in IRC is limited. I think the smart owners will go IRC quickly.

The TP52's are not an owner driver class try reading the rule.

Good God, has that been changed? TP52s are the poster child for owner-driver as far as I and everyone else but you know. Has the "rule" ever been finalized?

Do us all a favor and leave politics out of this thread - they are not part of this lesson.

Ivory tower. If you live in a vacuum, then there is a likelihood you will come up with a design as faulty as the TP52 Note smilie. I enjoy the distraction of chatting sail boats and ignoring reality. But lets not pretend that those who race them are not connected. A study of boat design is a study of politics. This is especially true when there is design-by-court mentality as there has been with the LPS requirement which is the foundation of the TP52.

A tp 52 has nothing other than length in common with the SC52 and there are currently 30+ TP 52's world wide.

Wasn't there a rule that only racing boats could be called TP52s? When they stop racing they are called TP53s. Myth or change? The commonalities to the SC52 are many. They are of the same clan but the SC52s are the better vessels. Do you really disagree?

The RRS have not been altered try again - lies and more lies.

What Ivory tower do you live in? The 05-08 rules represent change. The primary change is an emphasis on making the sport great again. That means casting aside support for the big boats. Its a conspiracy against them

 

What a load of crap Frank. I'd be impressed by the shear volume if you hadn't just regurgitated, when not actually cutting and pasting, the vast majority of it. Repeating the same crap over and over again doesn't make it right. Didn't you learn that in elementary school?

Your sorry *** was BANNED from SA. You know it. We know it. You are a fool to try to deny it.

 

Frank. Why would the letter in 48 North mention IRC? To my knowledge it was written about a race that was run under PHRF. There would be no need to mention IRC. Please explain how your dislike of someones writing style indicates that their boat is for sale. Are you hoping to buy it? You are obviously increadibly jealous of it. Please take your political views and shove them up your ***. This is not the place for them. And we're all still waiting for you to respond to the proof that you were banned. To help you out I've added said proof to my signature line. Please answer the questions directly and without your usual spin and incoherence.

 

Pity, isn't it? We all want to engage Miggie on design and he insists on throwing rocks. Is he jealous? He's jealous of anyone who spends so much time enjoying their boat. I still want him to explain that stern wake photo and how he has decided that he's planing.

 

Jim, post the photo. I wasn't able to find it, but if you post it, we'll all be able to take a look.

 

Migghie has a shot on his website (http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/FLM202.JPG) he has waived around saying he's planing.