34th America's Cup: multihulls!

[CT 249]

I've done many racing and cruising miles on conventional" monohulls, CT; but mostly lightweight ones, have nothing against them, enjoyed the experiences of planing. But boring heavy boats, no, kept away from them if possible, but have sailed on a few, boat tests for NZ yachting magazines - but preferred the "en"-lightened versions, much more fun, the joy of fast sailing ... so no, don't hate monohulls ... although a certain simplistic hater would like to brand me so.

I share your love of light craft but the fact that you prefer light boats does not mean that they are "enlightened".

Take, for example, a couple who are lovers of ultra heavy boats. They are demonstrably very intelligent. They are, as a matter of simple fact, successful in their professional fields - far more than you in a similar field as far as I know, or I in my field to be honest.

They are, as can be proven by their amazing record in some of the world's great races, extremely successful sailors - vastly more successful than you (or I) .

They are, as shown by something like 35,000 miles of world cruising and 30 years of living aboard, extremely experienced at making a boat a home - many times better than you or I.

They are very good at boat maintenance, as can be proven by the way their boat looks as it approaches 50 years of hard racing - much better at that than I am, although AFAIK you build a fine craft.

They had the initiative and enlightened attitude that allowed them to take a completely "outmoded" boat and win some of the world's great races with it, AT THE SAME TIME as they did many shorthanded cruising miles AND had successful careers.

By any reasonable or logical measure, these people are experts in their field. And yet according to you, it seems that this admirable couple are "un-enlightened" and doomed to live in the dark of ignorance, because they prefer heavy boats.

Is your sneering attitude of immense superiority towards people who have different preferences in boats in any way logical, supportable or admirable? It certainly looks like something very different from here.

To be honest your attitude seems to be the close-minded one, as it does not allow for any views or values apart from those you hold.

 

[oldsailor7]

I am going to try and be a bit serious here.

I love sailing. I love sailboats-----all sailboats, of any configuration.

I have built, sailed, cruised and raced monohulls from 7ft to 60ft.
I have built, sailed, cruised and raced multihulls from 16ft to 52ft.
I have loved them all because they are SAILBOATS.

I PREFER Multihulls to Monohulls because of my aeronautical background.
I do not HATE monohulls. I just regard them as less efficient than Multihulls.

I do hate pseudo sailboats which have to have motors running at all times to power the hydraulically operated swing keels. It's just a phurphy to say it's not a motorboat, just because the motor is not connected to a means of propulsion. The use of the motor Enables the effective use of more sail power
by shoving the 7 tons of ballast to windward, with all the increased form, skin friction and induced drag that is involved. UGH!!!


It is a pause for consideration that the record for surface circumnavigation of the planet is held by a pure sailboat, beating the previous record, held by a nuclear powered submarine, BY 15 days.
Around the world at an AVERAGE speed of 29.6 kts.

Thats Sailing.

 

[daiquiri]

Ok, that's a good post. I agree with several of your points, in particular regarding the canting keel (which, however, is still an exception and not a rule in the sailing world).

This phrase has caught my eye: "I do not HATE monohulls. I just regard them as less efficient than Multihulls."

Made me think a bit... How do people define "efficiency" for such comparisons?

 

[michael pierzga]

Hmm... Monohull Less efficient?


I dont agree.

 

[Earl Boebert]

Well, my take on this AC is that the problem is not the boats, it's the venue. I grew up on San Francisco Bay, and I wouldn't go banging around on it at 30-50kt in anything, especially not in the channel between the Embarcadero and Alcatraz. I think LE and RC figured they had fine-tuned the performance envelope allowed by the class rule to just barely fit the location. Then ETNZ figured out how to beat the indirect ban on foiling and now we have *way* too much boat for the conditions. Somebody should have given LE and RC a copy of "Men Against The Rule."

The real irony is that the organizers wanted spectacle, but the boats are so big that they appear to spectators to be going much slower than they really are.

Hey, if a bunch of rich guys want to race monster foiling catamarans, it's their money. Doing it in a location that adds unnecessary risk is uncivilized.

Cheers,

Earl

 

[Red Dwarf]

Hmm... Monohull Less efficient?


I dont agree.

It depends on how you define efficient. Is carrying tons of lead is efficient?

 

[michael pierzga]

A monohull and Two tons of liquid...one months supply...is efficient.

Multihulls are lightweight steamrollers...inefficient.

Sure...you can add gizmos to overcome your lightweight steamroller status..is this efficient ?

 

[EvanStufflebeam]

Simeon Tienpont's twitter picture of wing 3

 

[CT 249]

If a sailboat is built for it's owner's pleasure, and carrying tons of lead allows that particular owner more pleasure because it allows the boat to cater for the owner's particular joys, then surely it is efficient?

Lead is slower, but in leisure equipment it's not a simple case of faster being better. My fast windsurfers often feel boring to me even when they are doing over 30 knots. The Laser or the keelboat feel like they are supersonic when they go a third of that speed and therefore they can be more efficient at being fun, which is surely what it's all about.

 

[Richard Woods]

I share your love of light craft but the fact that you prefer light boats does not mean that they are "enlightened".

Take, for example, a couple who are lovers of ultra heavy boats. They are demonstrably very intelligent. They are, as a matter of simple fact, successful in their professional fields - far more than you in a similar field as far as I know, or I in my field to be honest.

They are, as can be proven by their amazing record in some of the world's great races, extremely successful sailors - vastly more successful than you (or I) .

They are, as shown by something like 35,000 miles of world cruising and 30 years of living aboard, extremely experienced at making a boat a home - many times better than you or I.

They are very good at boat maintenance, as can be proven by the way their boat looks as it approaches 50 years of hard racing - much better at that than I am, although AFAIK you build a fine craft.

They had the initiative and enlightened attitude that allowed them to take a completely "outmoded" boat and win some of the world's great races with it, AT THE SAME TIME as they did many shorthanded cruising miles AND had successful careers.

By any reasonable or logical measure, these people are experts in their field. And yet according to you, it seems that this admirable couple are "un-enlightened" and doomed to live in the dark of ignorance, because they prefer heavy boats.

Is your sneering attitude of immense superiority towards people who have different preferences in boats in any way logical, supportable or admirable? It certainly looks like something very different from here.

To be honest your attitude seems to be the close-minded one, as it does not allow for any views or values apart from those you hold.

Sunstone? only its 170,000 miles not 35,000

Richard Woods

 

[CT 249]

Yep, Sunstone. 170,000? Wow, shows I shouldn't have relied on memory! I may have been thinking about the number of cruising or racing miles they did before the left the UK.

Not the type of boat I would own personally, but brilliant in many ways and the choice of a very smart and enlightened couple who dearly love it for very good reasons. Sailing her wasn't exactly the type of sailing I prefer but it was very interesting and far from boring. It just underlined to me once more how boats, like wine, food and music, are a matter of personal taste.

 

[Gary Baigent]

Well, this AC racing thread has done an extremist turn, now discussing ultra-heavy displacement cruiser/old time racers - don't think that design would compare very well with ETNZ on SF Bay.
Nothing to do with UHD's owners' intelligence or taste (S&S boats all look good) - but get real; a race in such boats would be an extreme non-event. If some are saying (blindly, imo) that the big cats appear slow (and boring) some high rocker heavies would really light up spectator interest, no?
I remember the S&S Spirit arriving in Auckland after coming down very quickly from Fiji many years ago, a beautiful flush decked, light-ish day sailer (that covered oceans) ... with a long keel, went extremely well and I loved the boat's appearance, have a couple of photographs I took, might post them ... but on another thread?
Spare me the lectures, if you please.

 

[daiquiri]

What are we actually discussing here?

 

[Richard Woods]

post 1413 I think

Richard Woods

 

[motorbike]

Perhaps the multihull sycophants need some counselling to get over their inadequacy issues, most of the sailing world don’t care if you sail a multi! The AC is not about multi vs mono or old tech vs new tech, it’s about really rich guys yacht racing. The real conversation is about the choice of platform and format. Many hold the opinion that the sheer speed, size and cost of these boats is detrimental to the sport of yacht racing and the spectacle of the AC. I for one enjoy the 3-D chess game, tacking duels etc that go with the cup. We are yet to see the racing so we may all be surprised, if it comes down to a equipment competition and drag racing then all it will be is a big multicoloured high speed billboard chase around the cans. Yawn. As for all the carbon, wings etc- No one I know even remembers much about the 2010 challenge let alone talks about it. Plenty remember ’83 and ’87 and I suspect the reason is that rafts were boring to watch for whatever reason. Personally I dont mind if its multi or mono, but my opinion is that this format has a lot to be desired.