fast but lightweight cruiser

Rapscallion, the floats are there really to provide buoyancy when at rest; they are on a square platform, meaning very wide overall beam, meaning the floats do not have to be high buoyancy to do their job.
If I had the courage I'd make only foils out here, no floats, just a swelling at the top foil to provide some flotation ... but I'm too chicken.
Yes, you have to ease main when tacking - and that is the tricky part of light, wide, foil boats - (because they don't carry weight momentum at slow speeds, want to stop - or even reverse).
However once moving, the foils immediately begin to provide lift, you sheet in and accelerate and the platform gains the feel of solidity. It is kind of magic.
I am still amazed at how the giant AC72s tacked while foiling/flying; I have never been able to achieve that. Come close in flat water, fresh winds though. The AC72s proportionately have much, much deeper foils than my backyard designs.
The cruiser would not be a flyer, just foil stabilized.
10.5 metre x 10 metre boat; I'd hope to be around 1200-1500kgs. Groucho is a longer/wider platform and weighs 650kgs.
Cav, once the boat starts flying, your endplate of your outboard foil/rudder would be going in and out of the water surface - therefore anti-cavitation would be erratic. Sloping the foils forward does slow air "pollution." Better to have C or L foils running deeper, imo.

 

foil area

Gary, how do you size your foils for a "foil assisted" boat? Particularly as add on/retrofit float foils.
Bruce

 

I was thinking of these proa guys, Gary and the hunt for the steering oar...pondering a deeper v wave following sled to follow the surface. Using the hulls is easier for sure but there are arguments for keeping things outboard. A windward hull foil does make sense for leeway, anyone try steering with a brucefoil?

 

One of the proas I sailed had a Bruce foil. Horrible thing, lots of aeration and massive drag.

RW

 

Thanks Richard, that is what I would expect because the angle would be pulling up or down as soon as you turn. To get a rudder/dagger you really have to skip the lift/downforce.

 

I am no mathematician but have learned through suck and see, starting with Flash Harry too long ago, and have found that my guessing on foil sizes and areas has always tended to be too large - so have ended up cutting them down. The faster the boat, the higher the lift and the last thing you want is a great lump of a foil thing dragging along. So my foils tend to be quite small in area. Take a look at Sid's. Can't remember the measurements; will do so later for you.

 

There is some boat stuff in this that is relevant to the thread, but mostly it is two mules butting heads. Read it or ignore it. Ignoring it will cause it to dry up quicker than anything you write.

You always start all of them, by telling everyone your "feelings about Rob". If you could talk about boats instead of your "feelings", the problems would never start.
If "my bad" is a good enough apology for comparing someone to G Bush on a public forum, then it is more than enough for whatever you think I have said about you, your boats, your pride, your honour, your feelings and whatever else you think i have impugned. My bad.
Now will you please stop abusing me?

Not losing that rig in 40,000 miles is a credit to your seamanship and your caution, not the rig. Or not. To find out, next time you are reaching in 20 knots under full sail at night, pull the helm over and gybe without touching the sheets. That will put the rig, stays and beam strength issues to sleep one way or another. Or just tell us what you think will happen.

We did this in a 50' harryproa in the Brisbane Gladstone race 5 years ago. The helmsman dozed off at 2 am, the boat gybed, the rig weathercocked, the boat stopped. We unwound the mainsheet from around the mast and carried on. Took me longer to get out of bed than it did to fix it and get sailing again.

Your safety record since the first one broke is a credit to your boat building skills and seamanship, attributes I have been praising for 20+years. However, I think (happy to discuss it) you are taking a huge risk with beams that cannot withstand the boat being capsized the wrong way. If Cheers and Tom Follet could get caught aback and capsize, anyone can.

Harryproas have now developed the simplicity and safety issues to the level that I am chartering mine (Bucket List) for offshore racing, to anyone who wants to have a go. I will replace anything that breaks, apart from collision damage, free of charge. Would you do the same with a boat using Jzerro's design features?

For the umpteenth time! I didn't "find the faults" with your boats. You and Steve described them in your articles. Then published video of them pitching and slow, dangerous shunting. I agreed with you that your boats had weak points, and noted that they are not on my boats.
Aroha's voyage across the Tasman and the broken ring frame can be read about on the harry chat group and various other forums. As can all the other harryproa development problems and how they have been resolved. This openness and willingness to confront and fix problems is part of why harrys are popular, and why people who buy them are not fussed about ocean miles, particularly cautious ones.

You design boats for "lucky" sailors. No problem with this, as long as you acknowledge it, which until now, you haven't. I design them for everyone else. Hence, harryproas don't have daggerboards and their rudders kick up in a grounding or collision. Are they perfect? Not yet, but every iteration is an improvement.

Sure. My first 40' proa had Newick rudders. We occasionally ran aground at speed and had to shunt off, anchor, remove the tillers, lift the blade and replace the foam block. Not much fun. The final straw was a falling tide and hitting the mud on a run so we could not quickly shunt off. The rudders were turned, so could not be lifted. A fizz boat went past, big wake, boat bounced up and down and a blade broke. I have been using kick up rudders ever since (~12 years). And recently made them so they steer when lifted as well. Some of the early rudders had problems, which are pretty much fixed now, although there are still areas in which improvements can be made. I enjoy discussing these.

Newick rudders are not "the only way to achieve good control on boats like this". They are small, only one can be used at a time, they cannot be lifted for shallow water steering, they don't kick up and you must remember to lock/lift the front one each time you shunt or it will be destroyed. If you hit something while they are turned, they can jam and/or damage the hull. If you want to lower the front one for helm balance, the foil shape is backwards.

Harry rudders kick up in both directions, are oversize (no daggerboards) and if required, work together. Think all wheel steering on a car. They can also be used in the same direction to crab the boat off a jetty or to clear an obstacle when sailing upwind. They work in 6" of water and at slow speeds, don't need antifouling or holes below the waterline and can be lifted or lowered for balance. They work in both directions, instantly. They don't look nice, but we are working on this. They are cheaper to build and maintain.

If you survive the all standing gybe in 20 knots, sail your boat flat out up the beach (or into a rock or log) with rudder and daggerboard down. That will put the rudder and daggerboard safety issue to sleep as well. If Team Vestas can hit an island, anyone can.

My approach is to be open about failures, honest about what the boats will and won't do, accept new ideas, don't accept that something is ok just because everyone else does it, test as much as I can before I sell it and employ a top engineer to check as much as possible. Judging by the number of harryproa plans sold/boats built, it seems to work.
You need to make up your mind. The Jester class proa, as far as I can see, has the same safety issues as Jzerro (maybe not? Let's discuss it) and has your name on it, as does Madness. I sincerely hope your "my proas are not safe offshore" comment does not come back and bite you.

My response to the personal stuff starts here. Not worth reading unless you are a proa tragic from way back, and probably not even then. But if I don't refute this stuff, it pops up as "facts" in other forums and in emails from my opposition.

Without criticism? You called me a liar in your first ever forum post, and have continued to do so or imply it ever since, including in this thread, the Proa-File forums, the Wooden Boat forum, Sailing Anarchy and on at least one web site. You have never referenced what you thought I was lying about or how it was incorrect. Just hoped that if you said it often enough, it would be believed. Fortunately for me, most people are not that stupid.
As Gary said in his book, your fans have been tearing me (and harrys) apart since I first suggested them on line 15+ years ago.

Don't be silly. No one "dammed the boat". I pointed out what Steve had written in the Cruising World article. And you are now saying that "it didn't bother you", ie it was correct. What is the problem?

I don't need to "discredit your concept". You and your fans have done a much better job than I possibly could, as shown by the total lack of success at least 2 of them have had in selling the concept. All I have ever done is point out what was written and how I have corrected your design's "weak points"

As you know, I've been doing that for ~20 years. For evidence, join the harry chat group, check the archives of Mhml and the proa forum, read www.harryproa.com, ask me questions, discuss the boats or talk to the owners.

Maybe because you have neither seen nor sailed a harry, nor listened to anyone who has? Your refusal to discuss them could also have played a part.
I'm not sure what your motive is, but when Gary points out your contradictions and your boats' shortcomings in a book read by thousands, if not tens of thousands of people, you say is "It's mean spirited and wrong, but I won't hold it against you" and forget it. When I discuss your boats with an audience of a couple of hundred, you land on me like a ton of bricks, while admitting that on the only points you have discussed (gybing in a breeze, rudders, the accuracy of Steve's article), I am correct. Strange priorities. Is it because Gary does not design proas?

It's not. It is a list of some of your boat's weak points (your description, not mine), statements that they have worked, (but are not ideal and need luck to be safe), and more criticisms of me. Remove all the sentences containing Rob, me, my, and I from your posts. Leave in all the ones that mention harryproa or anything that specifically applies to harryproas. There is nothing left apart from a broken ring frame that should have been a bulkhead, masquerading as "serious structural damage".
This is not "criticism of Rob's boats", it is self indulgent spin. Criticism is what I said about your rudders and what you said about your rigs (not ideal, will get blown away in a breezy gybe). Feel free to point out any mistakes in my description and do the same to my rudders, beams, rig, layout, costs, weights, build methods or any of the other harryproa stuff that you don't agree with or understand. I would welcome the feedback and enjoy finding improvements. That is what boat discussion forums are for.

The more views aired on a forum, the more I enjoy it. Three things spoil it:
1) Abuse and claims not backed up with facts, figures, pictures or logic. Stuff like "Gary, you are mostly wrong" without explaining where and why.
2) Ignoring questions. Your acknowledgement about the shortcomings of your rig and rudders, and agreeing with what Steve wrote in Cruising World answers questions I have been asking for years, so that is a big step in the right direction. Thanks. I'll post them on the other forums, to set the record straight.
3) Prima donnas threatening to leave unless they get special treatment (those who do leave, always come back. It's a vanity thing). If you don't like someone, ignore them, or complain to the moderators.

As far as I am concerned, you are welcome, if you play by the same rules as everyone else and stop substituting personal abuse for boat discussion.

Gary,
re Crew June 2010: Perforated Texan hats in the PNW? Who would have thunk?;-)

Cav,
CARD is an excellent idea, would save a lot of mishaps, but not very useful on a proa.

rob.

 

Glad you like CARDS Rob. For a Proa the idea was to have 2 located for a dagger/rudder combo or a drum rudder/blade at the appropriate balance point with the rig, one for each shunt. Then each has to only kick up in one direction. Personally for safety in close maneuvering I also think proas should be able to tack as well as shunt, something your rig and beams look capable of.

For the system to kick up both ways the sled has to pivot which adds weight . and complexity.

For tris and cats especially there aren't any issues but I was thinking more of the cruiser than the racer.

Wave following suspensions could be as simple as the leaf spring used on Adrenalin by the Gougeons, something long travel and adjustable for damping anyway. I like to toss concepts around for faster development. The balance to find is between drag, cavitation and weight and utility/safety on any system. A proa rudder/foil thread should probably be started to be fair to Gary.

As to the personal stuff I think it would best be sent in a PM in future by both parties. If someone doesn't post nobody learns their view point. Perhaps it would be better for Rob to say "My beams are strong enough to survive being caught aback." Or Russ to explain," My beams are kept light for high performance on the designed tack." etc....without mentioning the other designer. What Russ does for himself is an entirely different design requirement than Rob's work to keep the average bone head afloat and upright. To me that is all Russ ever said, along the lines of "Hey I drew this boat for myself, for others changes might be needed to make it suitable."

Least said soonest mended is the saying...Boatdesign readers are smart enough to pick up on the silly stuff with out having it spelled out.

 

Reading through the thread it seems Russ was here to learn more about the tortured ply construction Gary uses. To supplement the Gougeons I'd look at load analysis software or renderings of similar boats that can be found various places such as the Shuttleworth site. The skin thickness is the basic structural strength needed in the whole boat, if a beam mount area needs 3 times the strength that has to be built up with 3 layers or the appropriate fabric/epoxy used. A stock laminate schedule can provide the clues once the skin base line is established. Gary's real world testing of what has broken and what hasn't is a great place to compare laminates.

 

The very blurred line between fact and fiction.

Rob, Its time, after all these years, to launch a boat that actually sails, without all the usual excuses, that is strong enough for the intended purpose, passes the relevant safety standards, and enter some races and prove you theories.
Lets hope no one dies.

WORDS ARE NOT ENOUGH

Seasons greetings to all

 

peace on earth to all men of good will

Well, Barra, that is a peculiar way to extend Seasons Greetings to all. I hope it is not necessary to have snow on the pine trees to remember that part of these greetings are meant as wishing peace on earth to all men of good will. Posters in this thread I have found to be men of good will. Another part is wishing for good health. Clearing allergies against particular allergens or specific people, can be part of that.
Seasons Greetings from snow covered Belgium.

 

lucdekeyser;
While I've never experienced a white Christmas, if I did I would hope it was in Belgium with all that lovely beer to comfort me.
Seasons Greetings to you.

 

I successfully raced my elementarry (25' proa) against the Tornados and H16's in Perth 8 years ago, and an early 40'ter off Fremantle before that. Both were in regular sea breezes, ~25 knots. Ono (15m cruiser) has raced in the Baltic, the others are cruisers, with non competitive owners.

I have raced 7 Sydney Hobarts, 6 Bris Gladstones plus sailed near enough 70,000 offshore miles over the last 40 years, so have a fairly good idea of what is required.

Anyone who can't understand (ie needs to see one sailing) that a proa is lighter, cheaper and faster than any other boat is so conservative that they would probably not sail one anyway.

Apart from the rudders, there is nothing on Bucket List that has not been well proven on many other boats. And if you do break anything on a charter, I will replace it. Free.

 

For those interested in Russ' tortured ply results. http://www.ptwatercraft.com/Begining Tortured Plywood 1-6.pdf

rob

 

Ah ha, another Luddite flat earther - who should be (if he was a modern man) using expensive Nomex or high density foams and carbon fibre laminates - but instead using low tech, unfashionable and primitive wood to make .... very quickly, astonishingly light and stiff hulls at a (cheating) fraction of the price.
Here is the work of another weirdo head case.