Old Quarter Tonners -Magic Bus

[Gary Baigent]

modern lift daggerboard design?

You know, those centreboard/daggerboard IOR designs of the late 1970's were, I think, really fast boats with their very light displacement and lifting foils plus moderate, dinghy type sail area; they certainly handled (mostly) savage wind and sea conditions here in NZ and went on to win races. Those designs were rockets off wind being able to lift their boards and reduce wetted surface areas and drag plus also being excellent windward performers too, certainly upsetting the fixed keel designs of the day with owners grudgingly accepting they were sailing in a second division. Does anyone ever consider building a modern (although again IMO you would be hard pressed to make any real performance gains against those classic and rapid sailing versions), maybe higher technology materials in hulls and sails would make some improvements ...... how would they stack up against similarly sized sports boats with fixed bulb keels of today? - not talking canters here, but then again, why not? Or am I talking utter toss?

 

[alberto88]

sportboat

the modern sportboats around 6.5m is faster a lot faster than many IOR boats, would guess 1 tonner would be almost on par or slower with the fast sportboat like Thomson, Shaw, and so on.

Lifting keel is not work on a sportboat, because use the keel foil to get lift downwind and plane up on it; this why can plane in 10 knots; would be risky to sail it with bulb raised as then boat would be not stable in capsize situation; if lifting keel like that, then maybe better to get rid of bulb completely and sail like centreboarder.

Canter is not work for sportboat because good sportboat use crew weight mostly, no successful canting sportboat yet; need to be at least 9m I think for that concept to work.

 

[Paul B]

You know, those centreboard/daggerboard IOR designs of the late 1970's were, I think, really fast boats with their very light displacement and lifting foils plus moderate, dinghy type sail area; they certainly handled (mostly) savage wind and sea conditions here in NZ and went on to win races. Those designs were rockets off wind being able to lift their boards and reduce wetted surface areas and drag plus also being excellent windward performers too, certainly upsetting the fixed keel designs of the day with owners grudgingly accepting they were sailing in a second division. Does anyone ever consider building a modern (although again IMO you would be hard pressed to make any real performance gains against those classic and rapid sailing versions), maybe higher technology materials in hulls and sails would make some improvements ...... how would they stack up against similarly sized sports boats with fixed bulb keels of today? - not talking canters here, but then again, why not? Or am I talking utter toss?

I love those old boats, the daggerboard IOR boats from '76 to '78. They actually led to some cool board boats under the MORC rule. But the day of those boats is long gone.

They only did well in IOR under certain conditions, and only then because they took advantage of a rating loophole. Once the loophole was closed and they were rated for their true draft they could not compete.

They were fast and fun, but within 7 years those 38 foot lift keel One Tons were being surpassed by 30 foot MORC boats (with keels) on all points of sail (see attachment).

If you tried to depend on internal ballast on the very shallow hulls of today's sportboats they would not stand up. Also, the thin foils on the sportboats are not nearly as draggy as the old style keels, so there is less advantage to be had when the board is up.

I guess you could say things like the Volvo 70s are like the old daggerboarders in that they can reduce wetted area by lifting the boards, yet they maintain stability with their very low drag keel strut and bulb.

I would be surprised to see a similar 32 foot boat with a dagger keel that could be as good all around as a Melges 32. You might pick up a bit in light air running, but you would not be as good upwind, and would be in trouble when you crashed in a big breeze.

It certainly would be nice to have a worldwide rating system that would let us find out.

 

[Gary Baigent]

You're probably right Paul, but I wasn't thinking of a modern centre/daggerboarder version designed as a rating boat but a no rule, light displacement, wide hulled, no bumps or other nonsense flat out sports boat, see jpeg. Jim Young's Rocket 29, 31 and 40 (although the latter was not built and rigged to Young's specifications) are on the way to this type - and they would wipe *** of any sports boat in their size category. Extreme, a Young Rocket 29 here has a strangle hold, even today (and the boat is well on in years now) in the Coastal Classic, thrashing even much larger boats on time during this high profile, large fleet, NZ race. The original Rocket 31 was so light displacement, and so over dominating, that the boat was hated - conventional yacht owners treated it as if it didn't exist, a bit like as if it were a multihull. And the first one was not to Young's satisfaction either and in original form the light keel could lift. Remember when the really LD designs appeared here, the Murray Ross and Young types, they were all lifting keel/board at first - but later safety conformists decided there was too much skill required for the general public to sail them correctly and bulb keels were fitted. Imagine skilled 49er or Flying 18 crews sailing one of these larger versions. Food for thought, mate.

 

[Paul B]

Imagine skilled 49er or Flying 18 crews sailing one of these larger versions. Food for thought, mate.

I believe the whole idea of a keelboat is it is self rescuing. I know some of the sporties in NZ have had probelms with this, even ones with keels.

A Rocket 31 with only internal ballast and a lifting board would be very happy upside down. That's not something ma and pa should be out in.

Even the Classe Libre lake boats in Europe, 40+ foot skiffs with trapeze racks, kept their bulb keels. I imagine there would be no righting one of those after a spinout if the board was up and the ballast inside (or no ballast at all).

If you're not going to be self rescuing then OK, lift the board. But be sure you are sailing it like a 49er or an 18, with people who know what to do and chase boats standing by for when things go pear shaped. If there was a class for those boats they might be fun, but somehow I don't think the class would be very big.

 

[dahrens]

Thanks Paul. I got a phone number for the owner of Magic Bus. I'll send it to you offline.

 

[Paul B]

Thanks Paul. I got a phone number for the owner of Magic Bus. I'll send it to you offline.

Outstanding. Thank you for all your help.

 

[alberto88]

I am sure Custard Truck, Helter Skelter or Animal biscuit would be much more quick than any of the designs named above.

All only 7.5m long (smaller than the boats above) but cannot see how a 30 footer hot rod would be more fast?

Local boat is a shaw boat called ********, and it is very very faster, I think the bigger NZ sportboats are much faster than this boat?

But agree, not suitable for sail long distance; owner of ******** says very tiring even to sail coastal race 30 NM in ocean.

Anyway, in planing conditions, do skiffs raise the boards the whole way?

On windsurfer, we now use formula style fin, and just leave down the whole time; lifts really well deep downwind off the fin to drive much deeper than the older boards, with a smaller fin. Area downwind is a good friend, not bad thing.

 

[Gary Baigent]

Alberto, during their heyday, the IOR daggerboarders would lift their boards leaving maybe a quarter down when saiing offwind. The Farr SmirNoffAgen crew said if they lifted the board too far in hard running conditions, the boat would skid out and broach, so they left more board area down after that learning experience. In light airs the lifting board boats definitely had an advantage offwind - they also had an advantage beating upwind too because the boards were better hydrodynamic shapes than the fixed keel designs of the day.
The skilled crew on the Young Rocket 29 Extreme seem to be hardy enough to handle and win class in multiple Coastal Classic races, approximately 126 nm from Auckland to Russell - mind you kiwis are tough ********, mate.

 

[CT 249]

The fact that you Kiwis have a major 126nm race is part of the reason that the Aussie Rockets are modified. We don't have any glamour races for boats of that size, that are so short. As a result, most of our Rockets had to be modified to Cat 2 requirements. I know it annoyed Jim (a great designer) but not even Kiwis seem to be normally tough enough to do an extra 200-330 miles on a "standard" Rocket, especially since they wouldn't be allowed to enter officially.

Alberto, Skiffs keep the board down, but (from the very small amount of skiffing I've done) it's not because they really want to, but because they have to. If the board is up, it will hit the vang and you'll hit the drink. And with a 12 foot bowsprit out the front, you really, really need the centreboard to give you some control. With the board up, lee helm would become uncontrollable. Back in the '80s, when rigs were bigger, Rob Brown even had a canard centreboard just for downwind, to keep Southern Cross (or Entrad?) balanced.

Because a Skiff's rig and centreboard are rigidly connected, the centreboard's capsizing effect is less important. And FW fins are pretty small, compared to an 18's foils.

The FW board can be much less of an all-weather machine than a Skiff - on many (most?) days on most Aussie Skiff courses, a FW board would be miserably slow. Some days the board would be amazingly fast, but lots of the time it wouldn't be able to finish. A Skiff is designed much more for all-round performance.

The radical sporties seem a little bit odd to some of us. If you can only day race it, and if it can capsize, why not just get a smaller (but probably faster) Skiff or dinghy? Even the venerable FD, 505 and Sharpie rate similar to a T7 by some yardsticks.

Sure, some sporties can race against some leadmines, but not all of us see the fun in that since the two types are so different. It's a bit like taking on a bunch of Rockets with an 18 Foot Skiff; sure the smaller Skiff is quicker, but so what? And since a radical sportie can often be beaten by an offshore-capable cat or tri, the way some (not all) sporty sailors sling abuse at slower boats seems a bit odd.

The old IOR boats were giant killers in a different way; they were similar enough to the bigger boats that beating them actually meant a fair bit. However, I can fully understand why the owners of racer/cruiser keelboats were annoyed at being beaten by something like Newspaper Taxi. No ballasted mono is really very fast for its cost or size, so why bother pretending that they are? Why not enjoy them for what they are - fun, practical, close-racing boats that make great racer/cruisers - and allow the really fast boats (ie those without lead) to chase the ultimate in pace?

 

[alberto88]

I seen the boat ******** out racing against us before, I think they are happy for sail this boat a lot more than me, even though I got cold beer; stereo, dancing girls and comfort!

Mine is an IOR boat from before, so I know the good quality for sail a long way; everyone can have fun to race together.

 

[Paul B]

Alberto, during their heyday, the IOR daggerboarders would lift their boards leaving maybe a quarter down when saiing offwind. The Farr SmirNoffAgen crew said if they lifted the board too far in hard running conditions, the boat would skid out and broach, so they left more board area down after that learning experience. In light airs the lifting board boats definitely had an advantage offwind - they also had an advantage beating upwind too because the boards were better hydrodynamic shapes than the fixed keel designs of the day.
The skilled crew on the Young Rocket 29 Extreme seem to be hardy enough to handle and win class in multiple Coastal Classic races, approximately 126 nm from Auckland to Russell - mind you kiwis are tough ********, mate.

I have given this some more thought. What would happen if someone modified a Melges 24 so the keel would not bang around as it was lifted? Would they be faster than a standard M24 in fleet racing?

I think in a big breeze even the best pro crews crash out in the M24 Worlds. With the keel lifted you could never right the boat, so you would be out. If you have to leave 2' of board down for directional stability then you would only be saving the drag of a couple of feet of fin. Hardly seems worthwhile.


Regarding the other point:

I'm sure there are examples of "tough *******" Kiwis. I know the Aussies like to claim the same. But we "*******" aren't quite the nancy-boys you lot like to make us out to be. Two of the last three Volvo winners were skippered by "*******", and Californians at that! Note the other effort was led by a POM! The windiest Quarter Ton Worlds ever saw the Aussies and Kiwis coming behind a couple of Californians sailing a Japanese entry with two Japanese fellows. The famous Fastnet '79 race was won overall by who? Yes, 'mericans.

Doesn't matter how "tough" someone is, when their 30 foot sportboat crashes and there is no bulb keel to right the boat they are going to have to tread water until someone comes by to render assistance. Of course all the nancies here in the Northern Hemisphere would accept the assistance, while those from "downunder" would undoubtedly take their rigging knife in their teeth and get on with swimming to shore while pulling the boat behind them.

Hey, isn't Dalt's brother from down there?

 

[Gary Baigent]

hey Paul, I was just taking the piss, not being serious, mate. Nice humour on your part though.
To my knowledge none of the Rockets have capsized, and that includes the 31 Camp Freddie in the UK. I've also heard that lately this boat has been drastically altered, has bulb keel and other modifications. Jim Young is not impressed, don't know why people alter his designs.
Here are some figures for the original Rocket:
9.3m oa 8.35m wl 3.6m beam 3.65m draft 1723kgs displ 544kgs ballast 59m2 sa 1.6 Bruce no.
Check out that ballast weight then compare it Paul Whiting's IOR (considered nose bleeding extreme at the time) daggerboarder Newspaper Taxi:
9.57m oa 7.1m wl 3.15m beam 1.92m draft 2142kgs displ 997kgs ballast 36.8 sa 1.18 Bruce no.

 

[CT 249]

"Jim Young is not impressed, don't know why people alter his designs".

With much respect to Jim, beating other boats of similar LOA around a 15 mile race around Sydney Harbour just doesn't really rank that high in Oz or (IIRC) the UK. If you want to go quick on a short course in a small boat, a multi, Skiff or board is a much better way of doing it. Therefore we modify Rockets so that they can enter big Cat 2 races. Otherwise they are basically useless 'round here.

We just don't have prestigious Cat 3 races like you do. That's not knocking Kiwis, just reflecting the fact that conditions here are different and therefore we modify boats so that they can actually win or perform well in events that are considered to count.

While I've always had a lot of respect for Kiwi sailors and designers, the super fat/huge rig boats do seem a bit odd. Newspaper Taxi could do Cat 2 races and with the smaller rig and hull, a Taxi BUILT TO SIMILAR STANDARDS would probably be cheaper to run than a Rocket. The Taxi could also enter a race and have a whole lot of comparable boats to play with. And in some ways, adding about 40% extra sail (and 40% more cost, the way sailmakers charge) seems a somewhat inefficient way to go 20% quicker.

The Rockets don't have many comparable boats, can't do Cat 2 in their designed form, and to many of us the fact that they can beat bigger rating boats or bigger racer/cruisers is irrelevant - just as the fact that the Rocket gets beaten by a Formula board, Tornado cat or 25' multi is irrelevant to Rocketeers.

I remember racing the first Elliott 10.5 in Oz. At the time I was sometimes sailing a Farr 40 one ton. The guy who was running the Elliott proudly told me that it had a bigger kite than the Farr 40 IOR. It also had a bigger main. It had the same LOA, same beam, same crew numbers. It went about as fast, in Sydney conditions, as a Farr 40 IOR. So basically, we had a boat that was like a Farr 40 in size (allowing for the ends stuck on the Farr) but not quicker, and it couldn't win a race on a reliable handicap system. It was a great boat in some ways, but in other ways why bother with it at all?

Great boats all, but just different. Personally, I'd give 10 Rockets for one Starlight Express or Ragtime.....something that can go quick, rate okay, do really well in long races, and be used for family sailing. If you can't do that, why not just sail an off-the-beach craft?

 

[Paul B]

hey Paul, I was just taking the piss, not being serious, mate. Nice humour on your part though.

I was taking the piss as well.

However, there is some truth to my humour. Over the years there have been quite a few Aussies and Kiwis who have arrived here in SoCal and immediately, just on their nasally accents, you've had boat owners peeing all over themselves trying to entice the downunder expats to sail with them.

Every single one of these guys is a "expert" in boatbuilding, have always raced in fleets of 1000 boats or more, and have rarely raced in less than 50 knots of breeze.

The joke turns out it takes more than an accent and quaint sayings to get a boat around the course. One fellow earned the nickname "The Loud White Clown" before moving on. I'm sure he is now well paid by some owner in the Med who likes hearing the stories and the rhyming slang.