SARCH 7 ; new all carbon sportsboat w. comfort

Discussion in 'Sailboats' started by pogo, Feb 13, 2017.

  1. pogo
    Joined: Mar 2010
    Posts: 332
    Likes: 8, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 73
    Location: Germany Northsea

    pogo ingenious dilletante

    Some very clever new interior ideas for a sportsboat, separate head, big galley w. fridge, two permanent double berth, standing headroom 1.6m ,
    but, i'm missing the keel-trunk !
    She' s stylish. negative bow, double transom hung rudders, , chines, permanent bowsprit, ......
    She's of course trailable, mast lowering- system is standard.
    The yard claims an alloy lifting- keel with a lead bulb ( !!) of 350kg and a draft of only 0.30m (!!!), keel down 1.70 meters. Total weight 850kg !
    Again, in the pix and renderings i don't see any trunk , neither for a vertikal liftkeel (up to the ceiling) , nor for a swivelling keel ( with a keelbulb hard to figure out --wide slot at trunk's aft-end).
    Any idea ?
    Ah , the boat has a rotating carbonmast and is available from about 42000 €, really complete about 65000€.

    Have a look:
    http://www.sarch.es/s7---en.html

    More pix:
    http://www.sarch.es/media.html

    french and spanish press:
    http://www.sarch.es/press.html


    pogo
     
  2. pogo
    Joined: Mar 2010
    Posts: 332
    Likes: 8, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 73
    Location: Germany Northsea

    pogo ingenious dilletante

  3. CT249
    Joined: May 2003
    Posts: 850
    Likes: 24, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 215
    Location: Sydney Australia

    CT249 Senior Member

    I thought the interior pics showed that the centreboard lifts into the saloon?

    To me it looks unattractive; it reminds me of the Macgregor Powersailer in many shots. If they gave it a vertical stem you'd have more space down below, more space on deck, and it would be easier to anchor.

    The rotating wingmast concept never appears to perform as well in reality as in theory in monos. It's a concept that has been around in dinghies for many decades and that has been tried many, many times yet it only works in a small number of cases.

    The aft berth looks good, as does the treatment of the saloon bunk.

    I just don't get the idea of putting enormous freeboard on a short boat, rather than using the same amount of volume in a longer hull. Yes, marina fees may be more expensive but they are normally only a small component of the overall costs and the longer boat is faster, more seaworthy and more attractive. Just take the same boat, stretch it out, and it becomes much better. Just my opinion, though, and maybe I'm not aware of local rules and charges. My own boat used to get criticised for having an ugly high coachroof but these days she looks sleek by comparison to the newer ones!
     
  4. pogo
    Joined: Mar 2010
    Posts: 332
    Likes: 8, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 73
    Location: Germany Northsea

    pogo ingenious dilletante

  5. CT249
    Joined: May 2003
    Posts: 850
    Likes: 24, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 215
    Location: Sydney Australia

    CT249 Senior Member

    Centreboard, daggerboard, lift keel, drop keel.....it seems to depend where you are in the world and (around here anyway) from person to person and boat to boat.

    I've looked at that pic and can't see a keel or bulb. In the pics of the interior there seems to be a cable for an electric winch on the forward side of the head bulkhead, in the saloon area, and one pic of the prototype appears to show the keel/cb case and the saloon bunk in place.
     
  6. Corley
    Joined: Oct 2009
    Posts: 3,483
    Likes: 77, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 826
    Location: Melbourne, Australia

    Corley epoxy coated

    It's rather an ungainly thing but I can see what they are getting at. I'm not sure what their target market is exactly it would be practical for the skipper to sleep on overnight with a partner so I guess that aspect is catered for and might earn some brownie points with the wife when it comes to purchasing the boat. The separate head takes up a lot of room in the interior for a role that could be fulfilled with a simple porta potti.

    Most sportboats I've seen are basically daysailors I'm not sure that the additional accommodation aspects gel with that basic premise and they would add weight. So it's either a modestly equipped trailer sailor or a well equipped sportsboat. It's nice to see some different ideas in the segment the market will decide I suppose if there is a niche for a design like this.
     
  7. pogo
    Joined: Mar 2010
    Posts: 332
    Likes: 8, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 73
    Location: Germany Northsea

    pogo ingenious dilletante

    So, for "billabong sailers " centerboards, daggerboards and liftkeels/dropkeels are the same :rolleyes:,
    for the "rest" of the world there are a huge differences.

    pogo
     
  8. pogo
    Joined: Mar 2010
    Posts: 332
    Likes: 8, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 73
    Location: Germany Northsea

    pogo ingenious dilletante

    Yepp, i agree.
    With a SA of only 28,5m2 and a chute of 35m2 she's more an equipped and roomy but sporty (agrressive) looking trailer sailer.
    Real sportsboat Seascape 24 , SA 42m2 ; chute 67m2, 870kg.

    pogo
     
  9. CT249
    Joined: May 2003
    Posts: 850
    Likes: 24, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 215
    Location: Sydney Australia

    CT249 Senior Member

    It's not just an Australian thing. The Americans have called movable foils as heavy as 7 tons "centreboards" since the 1800s (see WP Stephens etc). The CCA style boats like Finnisterre were called centreboarders, despite the fact that their centreboards were often quite heavy.

    Farr called them "drop keels" in some places, "centreboards" in others and "lift keels" in others, all in the same publication (see their site, which contains scanned plans and descriptions from their old catalogue).

    Actually the term "daggerboard" was originally used for pivoting centreboards designed by Linton Hope in the 1890s, which were shaped like a dagger (deep and narrow, straight on the leading edge and curved on the trailing edge) unlike the normal low-aspect centreboards of the day. So the modern use of the term is a distortion of the original use. And down here at the time, the low aspect centreboards were called "gins" for some unknown reason. So if there are specific names for different foils depending on their weight, it's not universal.

    After all, there are dinghies that have metal centreboards and we don't call them "drop keels". In fact the early International 14s had 100kg centreboards; they never called them drop keels or lift keels despite the fact that they gave the boat quite a high ballast ratio.
     
  10. pogo
    Joined: Mar 2010
    Posts: 332
    Likes: 8, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 73
    Location: Germany Northsea

    pogo ingenious dilletante

    Mmh, i think one should know what he's talking about.
    Nowadays for me it' s out of interest how they named ballasted cenerborders under longkeelers in 1890 when no finkeelers existed..
    Also the incorrect definition by Farr in the 1970/80 is obsolet, ' cause he didn'nt differ between boats wih internal ballast and partly , or non ballasted center- and daggerboards.
    I don't want to put the blame on anyone, those days everyting was unknown, one could say new.
    Today we are able to define all those appendages exactly.
    With other words, historical definitions are historical , are partial, are defective, are obsolet.

    For me a correct definition is a must, 'cause a liftkeel with the whole ballast ( say 1ton) is much harder to design than a "liftkeel" with only 200 kg. Unfortunately the boating industrie tries to sell these boats with ballasted daggerboards and most of the ballast in the bilge as " liftkeeler".
    See Parker 275:
    http://www.yachtsnet.co.uk/archives/parker-27/parker-27.htm
    The boat is ballasted with 2500lbs, only 300lbs are in the ballasted daggerbord.
    To reach sufficient righting moment the amount of bilge ballast is very high.
    Compared with her bigger sister , the parker 325 we see the difference.
    She has a real liftkeel , all the ballast is in the bulb ( in this case a horizontal wing for standing upright).
    The 325 has a ballast of about 2400lbs. Because her ballast is much deeper she's a stiffer boat with a much smaller ballast ratio than her little sister the 27.
    Conclusion, boats with real liftkeels are lighter, thus faster, and stiffer.
    http://www.yachtsnet.co.uk/archives/parker-325/parker-325.htm
    The drawback-- such a keel needs hydraulic for lifting, while a ballasted centerboard of about 300lbs can be lifted manually with a winch or e- motor.

    Swing keels
    Swingkeels are ballasted centerboards---pivoting keels retracted into a trunk. Most of the ballast of these boats is in the bilge, or casted iron directly bolted under the hull ( protection when drying out).
    Best examples are the Southerlies, electric or hydraulic driven swingkeels of about 1000lbs and bilge ballast of about 4000lbs ( it differs according to boatlength; southerly 95; 100;101; 105, 115; 32;35.....)

    Excerpt:

    All the Southerlys have fixed ballast in the form of a wide 'pancake' iron casting which acts as a grounding plate, through which drops an aerofoil section cast iron swing keel, which pivots on a stainless steel bearing, and is raised and lowered by a hydraulic ram - in all but a few early boats this is powered by an electrically driven pump, operated from the cockpit. There is though a hand operated back-up. The keel can be locked up or down. The photo at left shows the keel of a Mk I down with the yacht in slings

    http://www.yachtsnet.co.uk/archives/southerly-115/southerly-115.htm

    Kielschwerter ( there ain't no english word)
    These boats havebiron stubkeels with an integrated centerbord . In earlier days the centerboard was a simple steelplate, nowadays it's out of GRP and profiled.
    For obgaining the same righting moment as her finkeeled sisters , the stubkeels are much heavier. The boat is slower and of course the appendage is of poorer quality such a boat will not point so high as a finkeeler.
    Today all the modern Kielschwerter have little wings for standing upright when dried out. Mostly they have double rudders ( vulnerable -- same draft as the stubkeel.
    These boats are NOT supported by their rudders when dried out !
    Similiar to bilgekeelers they stand only on their keels when dried out. the balanced non-skegged rudders only touch the the mudd/sand.
    Beneteau, Jeanneau , Delphia.....
    http://www.google.de/search?q=benet...7AkIMw&biw=1024&bih=644#imgrc=vgcxZCS6zDNm6M:
    http://www.google.de/search?q=benet...7AkIMw&biw=1024&bih=644#imgrc=XR6yDt3jwZLyYM:
    As i've mentioned before, much too often thhese Kielschwerter are praised by yards, sellers and brokers as "liftkeelers".
    As we've learned, a real liftkeeler performs much better than a Kielschwerter !

    Under the hull pivoting keel
    http://www.rm-yachts.com/en/1st-lifting-keel-installed
    I'm sure you've noticed it, this is NOT a lifting keel as the yard claims.
    The pivoting keel has a sort af bulb at the tip and a very effective high aspect ratio.
    These keels normally have very much draft. For standing upright ,when drying out , the boat needs legs, sometimes they are telescopic and integrated.
    http://www.google.de/search?q=malan...7AkIKw&biw=1024&bih=644#imgrc=ZDkP72oqjyCP3M:

    Centerboarders with internal ballast
    All Ovnis and nearly all polish trailersailer have non ballasted centerboards and bilgeballast, here lies the main reason for poorer upwind performance. Together with little daggeboard area and high freeboard for max. volume inside we get ....
    http://www.google.de/search?q=viko ...7AkINg&biw=1024&bih=644#imgrc=hOXU1KACF2zmXM:
    http://www.google.de/search?q=viko ...7AkINg&biw=1024&bih=644#imgrc=IvSLKi9T9-JwbM:
    http://www.google.de/search?q=ovni 32&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=de&client=safari#imgrc=Q3JDCSyebvxDGM:



    Notice,
    for real shallow water cruising/sailing all the above bespoken appendages must be bulletproof. that's s a real challenge for the designe and costly for the yard.
    I' m not talking about occasionally drying out and smooth beaching.
    I' m sailing about 40% in shallow waters, since 1978 with own boats.
    I've tried , built , rebuilt, modified and designed dozens of centerboards, daggerboards, liftkeels, transom hung kick-up and cassette rudders , balanced low aspect ratio double rudders.
    The , no , my disadvantage is that all these appandages are in a niche.
    Common people wanna have variable depth for trailering and perhaps for occassionally drying out.

    mea culpa.

    pogo


    .....
     

  11. CT249
    Joined: May 2003
    Posts: 850
    Likes: 24, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 215
    Location: Sydney Australia

    CT249 Senior Member

    I get the point; it would be useful if we had words that were more tightly defined. However they are not - for example you use the term "ballasted centerboard of about 300lbs"; to many people the term "centreboard" does not apply to something carrying that much ballast. To such people, a 'centreboard' is something that carries no ballast and is effectively buoyancy neutral.

    My point was that while your definitions are useful, they don't appear to be well accepted and certainly in the English language these terms are not very well defined; in fact perhaps not defined at all.


    By the way regarding "Kielschwerters". There was a common English term for them - "keel/centreboarders". They were very popular in the US in the days of the CCA rule.
     
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.