Best rig for small catamaran circumnavigator?

Discussion in 'Multihulls' started by randy quimpo, Jan 23, 2006.

  1. rob denney
    Joined: Feb 2005
    Posts: 890
    Likes: 285, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 436
    Location: Australia

    rob denney Senior Member

    G'day,

    If you want to see an unstayed mast working, watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8chR6DAFjGA If a first generation $400,000, overweight (for it's mast design) 50' cruiser sailing effortlessly at wind speed does not convince you of unstayed mast potential, then I doubt you will be convinced by seeing one on a production boat half the size. If small production boats with unstayed masts are what it takes, check out Wylie cats, although if the ease of handling, lack of maintenance and reduced windage associated with an unstayed rig are not obvious to you then I suspect that nothing will ever convince you.

    Sorry for the thread diversion, stop reading if you are only here to discuss unstayed masts.

    This is the 11th of Bruce's 26 posts on this forum which have been antagonistic towards me, adding little or nothing except that antagonism to the discussion. He seems to have joined a group of people in various forums who get their jollies from knocking harryproas which they have neither seen nor sailed on. He follows the general trend, which is to start with general sniping, jump on any bandwagons that happen to be passing (eventually to the embarrassment of the people they are supporting), and when they feel they are losing the discussion (usually shown by former sceptics changing their minds, as in this thread), introduce increasingly wild off topic subjects they think might diminish me personally. In some cases this gets to the point of a serious complex http://www.wingo.com/proa/articles/moderating_the_proa_list.html

    The harryproa rudder story in brief.

    Apart from my many and varied prototypes, there are 5 harryproas sailing and one about to be launched. All 6 have similar rudder set ups which were designed and implemented 2-3 years ago.

    Harryproa design never stops. After much experimenting on my boat, I came up with a better rudder solution. This is the fifth or sixth major improvement since I first started playing with proas. The last 4 have been safer than the standard rudder and daggerboard systems on conventional catamarans. I advised all the current owners and builders of the improvement. One of the owners thought the new solution was a worthwhile improvement over what he already had. I therefore paid (a lot) for the engineering, drew the plans and gave them to the owner free of charge. Four of the other five owners are happy with what they have got, the 5th is dead. Only someone with a serious grudge could turn this scenario into "multiple expensive rebuilds by the owners"

    What any of this has to do with unstayed masts is a mystery to me. If you and Richard want to discuss harryproas, start a new thread.

    Your tacky insinuation says more about you than it does about my "design solutions", and nothing about unstayed masts.

    regards,

    Rob
     
    1 person likes this.
  2. Richard Woods
    Joined: Jun 2006
    Posts: 2,209
    Likes: 175, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1244
    Location: Back full time in the UK

    Richard Woods Woods Designs

    Rob, you wrote several long messages which will take time for us all to fully digest. (I wrote this offline before seeing the post above, and for those who might get confused, Wylie cats are cat rigged monohulls)

    But as a starter, and assuming I have this right. (I may not, as I write in haste, having got up this morning at 4am to move our boat onto the beach at high tide to scrub off. In half an hour I go back to antifoul it)

    My 11.3m Gypsy mast as a bare tube weighs 45kgs, 100lbs. However my rig uses a 13sqm genoa and 25sqm mainsail to get the total area of 38sqm. If it were a una rig the mainsail will clearly have to be bigger, but the boom cannot be much longer. So all the extra area must come from increased mast length. Roughly 4m extra. Then, as it is unstayed, there must be some bury. Say 1.5m

    Thus the total mast length for an unstayed una rig Gypsy is about 16.8m or 55ft. And that is adding no extra sail area to compensate for the lack of a screecher or spinnaker.

    It seems to me that a unstayed 55ft mast, even in carbon, will weigh over 100lbs?? Especially as unstayed masts, by their very nature, have to be heavier than stayed ones.

    I also am surprised that a professional boatbuilder could build such a mast, starting from the raw materials, to a professional finish, with carbon gooseneck, sail track and feeder, halyard entry and exit, fully painted as agreed it must be, and ready to fit in the boat in 35 hours (the average working week in Europe) or as you put it " Someone who had just built a boat would do it in a week"

    It takes me less than a minute to undo the turnbuckle on my forestay. I am very impressed to learn that you can step a 55ft mast by yourself in such a short time. Although I only have dial up internet access on the island where I live I can probably cope with downloading a 1 minute video, so, as I assume you have a youtube video to show how you do it, please give us the link.

    As a small aside, I prefer to use a masthead tricolour light when sailing in congested waters or when cruising short handed. How do you do fit one on a rotating mast? To my mind this one fact alone is one of the major disadvantages of using a rotating mast on a cruising boat.

    That's it for now. As I say I probably misunderstood your message. Maybe others can help clarify it for me. More to come when the boat is afloat again.

    Richard Woods of Woods Designs

    www.sailingcatamarans.com
     
  3. RHough
    Joined: Nov 2005
    Posts: 1,792
    Likes: 61, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 793
    Location: BC Summers / Nayarit Winters

    RHough Retro Dude

    Wow. Rob may be evangelical about proas and unstayed masts, but why the animosity? There is no doubt that a big roach main/small jib combo on a flexible mast is an almost ideal rig. If only 80% of Rob's claims are true, it is still a good rig. On fast boats, the BAW is always forward of the beam so mainsheet tension would share the longitudinal load of a screacher or A-Sail. The only concern I would have is a slow boat trying to sail deep with extra downwind area. A centreline rig on a cat might be better than a proa if you intend to use flying sails, adding a traveler would allow the mainsheet to help control the rig on both gybes.
    As far as cruisers and stayed rigs go, it is my experience that many cruisers do not perform what I consider minimum maintenance. They ignore tune, and hardly ever replace wire until something fails. An unstayed rig that needs none of the maintenance that cruisers don't do anyway is another point in favour.
    The proa vs other multi debate is for another thread. As far as rigs go, no one here is making a very good case for tradition ... except as a mounting for a masthead tri-colour. :)
     
  4. rob denney
    Joined: Feb 2005
    Posts: 890
    Likes: 285, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 436
    Location: Australia

    rob denney Senior Member

    G'day,
    Richard,
    Sorry about the long posts, They seem necessary as you seem so determined to read what you what you want to hear, rather than what I write. You did misunderstand my message, but I think this is a philosophical problem, not a time one.

    So you do not have to read so much I have condensed all my previous posts into a simple Q and A for you to answer:

    1) Unstayed masts are near enough zero maintenance. Yes/No/can't see why they would be
    2) Unstayed masts automatically depower in a gust. Yes/No/Can't see why they would
    3) Unstayed masts are low cost. Yes/No/Never built one, can't comment
    4) Unstayed masts are easily built. Yes/No/Never built one can't comment
    5) Any boat designed for an unstayed mast will be lighter than a boat designed for a stayed mast. Yes/No/Have not added up all the components can't comment
    6) Unstayed rigs are easier to sail to optimum performance than stayed ones. Yes/No/See the Woods Design Faq

    Answer these and I will go into more detail on anything that is not a Yes. Or just wade through the rest of my posts, most of it is explained there.

    To help you with 3) and 4) I suggested that you experience the building and sailing with an unstayed mast and then comment from a position of experience. I offered to supply anyone who wanted to try it the materials to build one and added a money back guarantee if I was wrong. If you just want to test the building, it will be even cheaper and quicker. I can supply enough materials for about 50 bucks.

    I will correct your specific misunderstandings in my next post.

    RHough,
    Wow, indeed, but nothing compared to what we can expect from him in the future, if he continues like the other trolls. Answers to your specific points later as well.

    regards,

    Rob
     
  5. Gary Baigent
    Joined: Jul 2005
    Posts: 3,019
    Likes: 136, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 509
    Location: auckland nz

    Gary Baigent Senior Member

    to those who are deadly serious and literal

    Hi Richard Wood
    It was meant as a facetious joke about my becoming an "expert" at sailing in reverse - to spell it out to those who take things literally, getting caught in irons was/is poor sailing - and the joke was on me. However in getting out of the in irons situation, practice makes perfect and that is why I could reverse Sundreamer and stay in reverse. If you want to see the really skilled, check out the last AC starts where the boats come head to wind and then stay there for ages, even reversing as a duet - that is real skill.
     
  6. Alan M.
    Joined: Jan 2006
    Posts: 154
    Likes: 9, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 140
    Location: Queensland

    Alan M. Senior Member

    Just a quick question about the unstayed masts. What kind of bearings do you mount them in? I would have thought something pretty substantial would be needed. Do you have to try to keep water out of the bearings? How would you do this?

    I'm kind of committed to a stayed rig now, but If I could build a carbon mast for a similar price to what I will be paying for an alloy one, ($2500 for 16m of 235 x 154 section) I'd be interested.
     
  7. Bruce Woods
    Joined: Sep 2007
    Posts: 137
    Likes: 13, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 90
    Location: perth

    Bruce Woods Senior Member


    You are dead right. No I'm not arguing that eliminating the stays is a bad thing. That would be a great thing if all the other good aspects of a stayed rig were maintained. What we are saying is that Rob continually overstates his case, Ignores the negatives and attempts to sell , yes sell, his products on this forum. I can't speak for Robs "problems" ? on other forums, but it appears if one points out the downsides to his "products" one is labeled as a general sniper.

    Getting back to the thread. The best rig for a small catamaran circumnavigateor is probably a stayed masthead sloop in my opinion..

    Because...
    1 low centre of effort
    2 Ability to utilize readily available cheap second hand materials and sails
    3 Proven technology.
    4 easily handled (low aspect)
    5 able to tune the rig to the conditions and boat load.
    6 easily repairable
    7 can fly extras
     
  8. rob denney
    Joined: Feb 2005
    Posts: 890
    Likes: 285, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 436
    Location: Australia

    rob denney Senior Member

    You assume wrong.
    The bare tube is only part of the rig. Add in the spreaders, wires, turnbuckles, fittings, jib halyard and the furler to get a comparable weight. This will be about 50% of the bare tube. Then add in the chain plates, jib sheet winches and tracks, traveller, etc and the additional fastenings, bulkheads and beefing up they require and you have the added weight of the boat. I will understand if you don't have these numbers, a lot of traditional rig designers don't. But until you do have them, you cannot compare the two rig types.

    I was using Gypsy for the numbers, not suggesting it for a una rig. The single sail mast would need to be further forward, the boom could be longer.

    Comparing rigs is a little more complex than just equalising the sail area.
    Your FAQ states that a stayed rig will be sailed at 70% vs 95% for a ballestron by Joe average. Given the nature of cruising sailors, I agree with these numbers. A single mainsail is even easier to set and forget than a ballestron, so it is closer to 100%, but let us stick with a 25% difference. Using this on your sail area results in a useful 28.5 sq m of sail area for at least some of the time.
    The unstayed rig boat will be lighter. Therefore will not need so much sail.
    The unstayed rig boat will spend less time reefed, especially in puffy conditions.
    Adding additional length to an unstayed rig adds very little weight. Adding 10% more length adds maybe 2% to the weight. Another complex subject.
    Spinnakers and extras need to be included in the equation.
    A rotating mast is more efficient than a fixed one, and a rotating wing section is more efficient again. Unstayed rigs rotate.

    As I said, it is far more complex than just comparing sail area, but 55' is way more than required for the same performance. The boat in the video sailing effortlessly at wind speed has a Bruce number of 1.27, comparable to your Miranda performance cruiser design less than fully loaded. Are there any videos of her in flat water under plain sail performing this well?

    Building:
    If you could read what I write, rather than rewriting it to try and trip me up, I would not have to write such long posts.

    The mast would have a sail track, could add a mast head unit if you liked, internal halyards are another hand me down from racers, they have no place on cruisers, but could include them if you wanted. Goosenecks, vangs and mainsheet travellers are not required on sensible rigs. Paint and standard of finish would depend on how professional your builder actually was. Even with all your add ons, I reckon it could still be done in a week. It would not be ready to step as the bearings need to be added and this can take a while (depending on the section) as you spend a lot of time waiting for epoxy to cure. Until you have actually built one, you can't really compare it to anything.

    Mast stepping:
    Again you are focusing on the wrong part of the discussion. You wanted to know if it could be done quickly and simply. It can.

    Tricolours:
    At least this is a (marginally) better reason than the ability to back the jib on a mooring! It is possible to mount a rigid tube up the mast and mount the tricolour on that. Adds some complexity to the bottom bearing, but can be (and has been) done. I personally detest masthead tricolours, ever since one failed in a shipping lane on a foul night and no one noticed until we got a vhf call from a ship. I like anything that can break to be within reach. I guess this is not a big deal to someone with a rig held up with up to 100 individual items (list them before you start typing, please), all of which need maintaining, checking and replacing periodically, because the failure of any one of them causes the mast to fall down.

    Hope this clears up your misunderstandings. Look forward to the actual rig weights and answers to my 6 questions.

    Sharpii2
    Carbon is easier to use than wood. The trick is to use a vacuum bag, which gives you pro quality with very little ability required. Start using tow and you will wonder how anyone builds boats without it.

    Your tippy mono would benefit vastly from a carbon stick. It will weigh 60% of a carefully built wooden one. Let me know the dimensions and I will see what I can do, especially if you can wait until later in the year when I will be able to offer you a much better deal.

    Fore and aft loads have to be got out to the hulls. But the problem is the reverse of getting the loads from the middle of a hull to the beams on a proa. Surprisingly little extra +/- 45 on either the beam or the hull to take the twisting loads is sufficient.

    Unstayed masts on proas may be obvious to you (and me), but they were no more obvious to most people when I first used them than they are to the traditionalists on this thread.

    RHough
    80%? Look forward to taking you sailing if/when the 50 hits the water and demonstrating the other 20.

    Spinnakers can be flown, but are a dangerous and expensive solution to the problem of having a rig where half the sails cannot be used on half the courses sailed. How much faster do cruising boats actually sail down wind with the spinnaker up than they do with a poled out jenny? Very little. If you can use the entire sail area (either all of a single main, or a main and poled out jenny) you save a huge amount of hassle, unless the main is restricted by swept back spreaders. These and spinnakers on cruisers are yet another manifestation of the "Race boats have one, so I need one", syndrome, which is basically what this thread is about. Broad reaching is where spinnakers and A sails can be handy, but that is at least partly because the headsail is blanketed by the main so is doing nothing.

    Our booms are self vanging so no traveller, vang or huge main sheet loads are required. The masts are stiff enough to support a hounds height spinnaker. The mast will bend, but won't break. The chute will look ordinary on a strong air reach (not recommended), but be fine down wind and reaching in light air. If i was cruising, I would not bother. My serious race proas do not have spinnakers, or any special light air or off wind sails. Their weight makes them not worth the effort.

    Alan M
    We use UHMWPE, a modified nylon. Works on the 50 footers, not sure yet whether it will be man enough for the 60 and 66'ters. Need to know your mast wall thickness (or weight/m) to give you a ball park weight, and hence cost for the mast.

    Bruce
    see previous posts.

    regards,

    Rob
     
  9. Richard Woods
    Joined: Jun 2006
    Posts: 2,209
    Likes: 175, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1244
    Location: Back full time in the UK

    Richard Woods Woods Designs

    For the record. I have sailed over 2000 miles singlehanded in an unstayed balestrom (Aerorig) catamaran and sailed briefly on two others. I have also sailed a lot of single sail dinghies, some unstayed, some stayed, some with metal masts, some with wood, some with carbon. Including Optimist, Topper, Europe, Solo, numerous International Moths, OK, Comet, Byte, Blaze, Stealth, Laser, EPS, RS600. Agreed some only briefly, but some for several years and some successfully.

    I have also sailed two proas, one briefly, one for a 3 month cruise, thus living on board. I have also "sailed" RC model yachts (mono and multi) fitted with balestrom rigs.

    OK, dinghies aren't multihulls but some principles are the same. For example I know that the unstayed rigs are always heavier, even when the rigging is included. Clearly a balestrom is always heavier than a standard boom.

    You are right, I don't have the Gypsy data with me, it is the UK and I am in Canada right now. So I could only give the accurate bare mast weight. However I do know that I struggled to lift the mast by myself (thus proving it weighed about 100lbs) but could easily carry all the rigging in one hand and the roller reefing gear in the other. So I agree with you. A standard Gypsy mast 11.3m long with stainless rigging and roller reefing gear will weigh in total about 150 lbs.

    I would never build a carbon mast myself. I know I am not a good enough boatbuilder to even try. But I have drawn two boats for Aerorigs (to Carbospars specifications) and helped build one. I know there is a lot of weight added to the structure to take the loads from the rig. I also know first hand that fitting the bearings is not easy. They need very careful lining up, made trickier when there is no mast available. Certainly much more labour intensive than bolting on a mast step and chainplates.

    I take my designing very seriously. I only want customers to spend their money, time on this earth and risk their lives on proven concepts. If I am not 100% certain about a design then I will usually build a prototype to test it myself before releasing the plans. So I will not draw a unarig boat with/without rigging unless I have real proof that it is a better solution.

    I feel one can only sensibly do this by making real comparisons. There is no point in, for example, putting a unstayed mast on a Harry proa and saying it is better than a Gypsy. You don't know whether it is the rig that is better or the proa. That is why I suggested trialing a standard F27 against one fitted with one of your rigs.

    Even though your posts are long they are still not always clear to me.

    You say "The mast would have a sail track, could add a mast head unit if you liked .... Goosenecks.... are not required on sensible rigs.....Paint and standard of finish would depend on how professional your builder actually was...."

    The only way I can see that you don't need a masthead sheave or gooseneck is if you have a sleeved sail (like a Laser) and a boomless rig. I am assuming that you aren't talking about a balestrom rig here as obviously if you are then you must include making and fitting the balestrom itself for it to be a fair comparison.

    I was assuming that when you said a builder could make one of your masts in a week that it would be to the same finished standard as a metal mast. Again if not then you aren't making a fair comparison.

    You say "Adding additional length to an unstayed rig adds very little weight. Adding 10% more length adds maybe 2% to the weight."

    Now I would have expected a mast that was 10% longer to be at least 10% heavier, not 2% heavier. Can you see how I get confused by what you write???

    To Bruce.

    I agree. In my experience there is a drawback to everything. If someone is promoting a product without mentioning that disadvantage then they are "selling" it not "promoting" it.

    To Gary

    I agree one can sail backwards in multihulls (we ran a fun regatta once years ago when one leg had to be sailed backwards). But given the choice when sailing off the anchor in a crowded anchorage, 60ft water depth and two crew would you sail off under a partly rolled genoa or backwards under mainsail alone?

    My boat is now cleaned and antifouled so I am off for a 2 week cruise/race.

    Richard Woods of Woods Designs

    www.sailingcatamarans.com
     
  10. Alan M.
    Joined: Jan 2006
    Posts: 154
    Likes: 9, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 140
    Location: Queensland

    Alan M. Senior Member

    The section is 8.2kg/m.
     
  11. RHough
    Joined: Nov 2005
    Posts: 1,792
    Likes: 61, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 793
    Location: BC Summers / Nayarit Winters

    RHough Retro Dude

    Here is an interesting bit about a uni-rig:

    The idea that a Balestron or Uni-Rig can be lighter than a conventional rig is novel. In a conventional rig, the hull has to take the longitudinal rig loads (forestay tension vs backstay (or main sheet)), on a Balestron rig, the boom must take these loads. Weight in the hull is traded for weight in the boom, this has to raise the CG.

    Another design challenge is the trade-off between mast cross-section, weight, and windage. To be light, the section must be large (unless the laws of physics have been changed), large sections are performance problems WRT mast/sail interaction. Shaping the section as a wing mast raises other challenges. On a Balestron Rig, unless the wing section can rotate above the boom the performance will suffer. That leaves us with an easy to build, rather large mast with rotten aero's or a more complex challenge of getting a wing section mast to rotate above the Balestron 'boom'.

    When compared to a conventional sloop rig, how does one get the 5-10 deg difference in AoA between the Jib and Main on a Balestron? The Jib must 'tack' and sheet to leeward of the mast for the rig to be effecient. This would seem to require jib sheeting points somewhere on the boom? Not a point, but an adjustable track of some sort. There is still a requirement to be able to control headsail shape if performance is to equal a conventional sloop.

    I'll return to my orginal thought; a conventional fractional rigged sloop with a rotating mast for my boat. ;)
     
  12. Richard Woods
    Joined: Jun 2006
    Posts: 2,209
    Likes: 175, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1244
    Location: Back full time in the UK

    Richard Woods Woods Designs

    Don't know where you got the quote, but I saw Jzerro and Russell last week. He was heading south from Lasqueti, we were going north and passed close by each other, both motoring. Stopped for a chat, a lovely, beautifully built boat. You'd never know it had crossed the Pacific twice. But I wouldn't sail it offshore.

    The Jim Brown sons are both highly talented builders/designers. Clearly being brought up on a trimaran works wonders!

    Just curious, where/what do you sail? I am on Saturna right now. Glorious sunshine and a good sailing breeze. That is why this will be my last message for a week.

    Richard Woods of Woods Designs

    www.sailingcatamarans.com
     
  13. Gary Baigent
    Joined: Jul 2005
    Posts: 3,019
    Likes: 136, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 509
    Location: auckland nz

    Gary Baigent Senior Member

    successful baelstron rigs

    I wouldn't be in such a hurry to denounce Elf Aquitaine's 1984 baelstron wing mast rig - the boat came in second across the line in '84 OSTAR - and that is no mean achievement in my opinion, mate. Umupro Jardin won that year but Fleury Michon took line honours and Fauconnier on Umupro was recompensed time after he had stopped to help Jeantot when he capsized the drastically shortened to 60 foot Credit Agricole - anyway that is bye the bye, doesn't alter the fact that Elf Aquitaine performed exceptionally well. Pajot did say however that after sleeping he sometimes awoke to find the boat caught aback and reversing - and at the finish he only lost out taking line honours by 23 MINUTES!!
    Later when Gilles Ollier redesigned the boat with new, longer 75 foot hulls and even taller balestron wing mast rig, the cat (renamed, Saab-Turbo) set a new Mediterranean crossing record broad reaching for long periods at 30 knots speed in very savage winds. An advantage of the baelstron is that the headsails and reaching spinnakers could be set off the baelstron bow (naturally) which rides higher off the waves than a conventional forward cross beam arrangement (this cat was one, if not the first, to have an X central beam design, no fore beam) and therefore did not bury in the large waves set up by the gusting 60 knot winds. This is an important safety feature and a large plus for the baelstron setup. Food for thought, mateys.
     

    Attached Files:

  14. RHough
    Joined: Nov 2005
    Posts: 1,792
    Likes: 61, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 793
    Location: BC Summers / Nayarit Winters

    RHough Retro Dude

    At the risk of being labeled a old fuddy-duddy ...

    Even among the wacky-racer crowd of high performance multi-hulls, the Balestron Rig is not a popular choice. Why?

    For a rig that showed as much promise in 1984 as is suggested here, why don't we see further development? What happened to AeroRig(tm)?

    The loads for a given area and wind speed are the same. Given good design, the same weight in material should be required to handle those loads. Much of the load must be contained in the Balestron Rig's structure, so the CG *must* be higher as well as pitching moment.

    Even in an unlimited budget arena like the AC, we don't see either unstayed rigs or Balestron Rigs. Why is that? If the claim that an unstayed rig is lighter is true, that means more weight in the keel on an AC boat. Only if the sailing performance of the rig was poor would a designer give up the extra RM a lighter rig would give.

    Now, in the context of this tread, for cruising, the rig may have some benefits for no maintenance, poorly trimed boats. Once the Balestron Rig is poorly trimed, it doesn't get any worse. This equates to better cruising performance than a once set then ignored conventional rig. ;)
     

  15. Gary Baigent
    Joined: Jul 2005
    Posts: 3,019
    Likes: 136, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 509
    Location: auckland nz

    Gary Baigent Senior Member

    balestron rigs

    Quite right RHough, we don't see many balestron rigs about - but that doesn't mean it is a poor rig concept. You know, as everyone else does, that mainstream yachting is ultra conservative, even timorous - and only grudgingly changes to new developments after, say, an average of two decades have passed before being slowly accepted. Look at foilers: superb examples appeared in that (golden?) decade of the 1980's, set records, won races and then they disappeared - to now become (grudgingly) with the popularity (in a few circles) of the foiling Moths; so foilers are reappearing. There is also that extreme beast l'Hydroptere that definitely gets even the most bigoted monohuller's attention. So foilers are on the way back - and no one will be surprised if some innovative, peer leading individual appears with an outstanding yacht and a balestron rig. Then balestron rigs will be fashionable, flavour of the month - and all the minions will be scurrying to catch up.
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.