TP52s

And yet you have shown that you don't understand the most basic things in yacht design.

I honestly can't tell whether you're ignorant or pathetic or both (well - yes I can...)

 

Farr International was a yacht broker, which has now been taken over by the former manager. Farr Design is alive and very well AFAIK. But don't let these little details bother you.

What is it with this Capsize Risk Ratio? Why is it so important to you? It only gives a very crude expression of a yachts stability. I don't think many designers use it in their daily work - why should they? They do their design work on the computer, which can give them a much more precise estimate.
Of course, I can't tell for sure, but I'm pretty confident that Farr Design doesn't give a damn about this ratio. I know I don't.

 

Oh lighten up. Consider me a true sailing anarchist. But recognize that the one that speaks out against the muddled consensus is worth 1000 yes men. Kahn.

 

More lies from Frank - you learning anything yet Frank?

Was involved in measuring a TP 52 after a mode change - 1 year old boat guess what, the only change in the boat was the predicted (intended) change in CG. Same hull shape - so lets hear it for another of Franks LIES.

Frank - you will never make it as an IRC measurer (you don't have the knowledge base).

Please refrain from make comments about rules - you are not a US Sailing or ISAF judge. Some people may mistakenly believe you...

Also your conclution is based on delusions - the TP 52's are still active and only the ones that have been "dummped" are the ones that can't hack it in both distance and bouys racing.

The SC 52 and the TP 52 have only one thing in common - the number "52". That is all talk to any desinger (real ones only please).

Frank keep your head down and learn from your betters .......

 

Lets look at another lie from Frank -
"... first generation of them were built for Atlantic waters ..."

Wrong they where built to distance race all over the world and several won their respected class in many races. They however went through a mode change rather than carrying two seperate sets of inventory etc (it's called cost control).

 

sorenfdk

Farr International was a yacht broker, which has now been taken over by the former manager.

actually Farr International was another Farr company owned by Bruce Farr and now to the delight of Farr 40 and Mumm 30 owners saved by it's President. see Stagg Yachts

The shareholders of Farr International announced June 20th, 2005 that Geoff Stagg had purchased the full shareholding of the company and that, after 23 years of trading under its present name, the company is to be renamed Stagg Yachts Inc., and that it will continue its present operation under his sole ownership.

For much of the time that Farr International has been trading, Stagg has been the company's President.

If you are implying that this is not a significant event then shame on you. It is a divestiture as significant as Microsoft's paying dividends.

Farr Design is alive and very well AFAIK. But don't let these little details bother you.

The devil is in the details. Farr Design and Farr International parted on amicable terms according to Barry Carrol. However, yatch manufacturers, designers and dealers have had less than amicable relationships elsewhere in the US. This translates into poor consumer support and it is so bad that US Boating now has a database tracking boat recalls. I am a member of Boat US but haven't figured out the database, which only recently went on line. It is the kind of detail that allowes a design to live or die on a track record.

What is it with this Capsize Risk Ratio? Why is it so important to you? It only gives a very crude expression of a yachts stability. I don't think many designers use it in their daily work - why should they? They do their design work on the computer, which can give them a much more precise estimate.
Of course, I can't tell for sure, but I'm pretty confident that Farr Design doesn't give a damn about this ratio. I know I don't.

Oh you are playing devils advocate. Arn't you. The formula penalizes boats with a large beam for there high inverted stability, and light boats for their response to large waves. Values over 2 fail the test for an ocean passage maker. This is such a design basic that you must be busting my chops. see http://www.johnsboatstuff.com/Articles/design.htm. The ratio was used for years to discredit multihulls and is the reason the "at least my S*#t floats" term was coined.

CAPSIZE RISK = beam/(disp/(.9*64))^.333 It is a seaworthiness factor derived from the USYRU analysis of the 1979 FASTNET Race, funded by the Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers (SNAME) . Values less than 2 are good. The formula penalizes wide boats for their high inverted stability and light weight boats because of their violent response to large waves. All multi hulls, some modern coastal cruisers and many racing designs have problems meeting this criteria. A racing design that fails this test can not be expected to be retired as an ocean cruiser.

The retiring of a race design to cruising is why US Sailing is no longer supporting elite race vessels or their designers. It has gone to far. Farr did indeed correct to this ratio. If the new generation TP52s are slower than the old it will be an eye opener. IF not Huzzah - the idea that a cruiser could also be a racer is supported.

 

The first 5 TP52s were built with tall masts meant for Atlantic waters. Those masts can take advantage of wind that is unique on the Atlantic coast of the Americas and found virtually no place else. We on the West Coast know this owing to the Lady Washington, a sloop vessel that took advantage of this unique wind while on the east coast that was quickly converted to a Briginteen rig (two short masts) before becoming the fist US vessel to circumnavigate. So much is knowable to designers by just hiring a historian.

 

umm no TP 52's were originally designed for the TransPac, hence the name. Their overall potential was realized when they were found to sail upwind at 11+ knots.

 

More lies from Frank - you learning anything yet Frank?

You bet. Are you?

Was involved in measuring a TP 52 after a mode change - 1 year old boat guess what, the only change in the boat was the predicted (intended) change in CG. Same hull shape - so lets hear it for another of Franks LIES.

Did that boat sail in 20k plus winds? I speak generally. In general it is predicted that the hulls of a TP52 will vary after hard use because the box rule favors putting the weight into the bulb rather than into hull structure.

Frank - you will never make it as an IRC measurer (you don't have the knowledge base).

And that base of knowledge is something any amature is capabable of knowing. It really is an opportunity for someone.

Please refrain from make comments about rules - you are not a US Sailing or ISAF judge. Some people may mistakenly believe you...

Every racer is expected to know these rules. I have taken instruction. The new rules take effect for SSSS in September. The one I like best allows for broadcasting the starts. In fact the Farr 40 owners may be responsible. They apparently would not race until the confusion regarding visual and sound signals was removed.

Also your conclution is based on delusions - the TP 52's are still active and only the ones that have been "dummped" are the ones that can't hack it in both distance and bouys racing.

See I didn't know any had been dumped. We learn from you. I knew one had been converted to movable ballast. The truth is that there are 4 or 5 generations of TP52s. We do not need a sixth. Lets see the entire debacle stopped. Why con lubbers. Why con Kahn. Well the Transpac starts. It will be interesting to see what happens with the 5 TP52s, including Braveheart I hope.

The SC 52 and the TP 52 have only one thing in common - the number "52". That is all talk to any desinger (real ones only please).

They were also both designed and promoted by the same former Farr designer.

Frank keep your head down and learn from your betters .......

I hold my head high and learn even from newbes. Virgins really do make the best crew. It is a shame to waist that on designs like TP52s.

Let me relate a notion that blows me away. The experimental air craft folks look for newbes that are middle age. They do not even worry about the trophy kids. There just are not enough of them in the US, I suppose. They were successful last year in getting a recreational license implemented which opens up the sport to many in the US who would not bother building or learnnig to fly air craft otherwise. So seriously, follow Bethwaite. Learn to fly, then sail. Then see if these betters really are.

Back to Sea Fair. You will have several Frank free days. Enjoy

 

Frank, you do realize that the Sailing Anarchy font is copyrighted don't you? And you in fact are in violation of that copyright. Or has your demensia progressed beyond all manner of reason.

 

Since the iception of the Class the rig size has NOT changed.

 

"Did that boat sail in 20k plus winds? I speak generally. In general it is predicted that the hulls of a TP52 will vary after hard use because the box rule favors putting the weight into the bulb rather than into hull structure."

The answer is YES so YOUR predictions are wrong (Again). Top wind speed seen acording to crew has been 31 kts - top boat speed has been 28.4 kts.
The hull structure is as sound as it was leaving the yard on day 1 (boat has even been through destructive testing).

"Every racer is expected to know these rules. I have taken instruction. The new rules take effect for SSSS in September. The one I like best allows for broadcasting the starts. In fact the Farr 40 owners may be responsible. They apparently would not race until the confusion regarding visual and sound signals was removed."

Stop drinking and typing - the New Rules (2005 - 2008) went into effect Jan 1 2005. The radio communications at the start is a courtesy. The starting rules RRS26 are the same as 2001 - 2004. So any error was on the part of the RC or Club. Take more instruction ....

"See I didn't know any had been dumped. We learn from you. I knew one had been converted to movable ballast. The truth is that there are 4 or 5 generations of TP52s. We do not need a sixth. Lets see the entire debacle stopped. Why con lubbers. Why con Kahn. Well the Transpac starts. It will be interesting to see what happens with the 5 TP52s, including Braveheart I
hope."

Wrong only on generation 4 with the Med boats (so another lie). The Dumped one was Victoria which was made into a swing keel boat (she never seemed up to speed). The difference between 3 and 4 are that gen 4 are set up for bouys racing primaryly where gen 3 is set up to be a mix boat. Gen 1 and 2 where for point to point (primarily).

"They were also both designed and promoted by the same former Farr designer."

Wong again my blundering friend - the SC 52 was a Bill Lee design (and Bob Smith ) and not Farr, it was promoted by SC yachts not by Farr. The SC 52 does not fit into the TP 52 box by the way.

"I hold my head high and learn even from newbes. Virgins really do make the best crew. It is a shame to waist that on designs like TP52s."

Newbies and sailing virgins may be capable of having fun on a TP 52 but would be totaly unable to jump into the class and be competitive even as only crew (Sorry you simply need skills to play at the level the TP 52's are on).

" So seriously, follow Bethwaite. Learn to fly, then sail. Then see if these betters really are."

Frank I regulary race I14's (Beiker 3CM) and have a few hours on 18's - and once again I ask you to put down the crack pipe and step away from the computer.

 

Damn the infernal Mac 26! Blam it! Note: I've got a thread for "blamming" (discrediting, insulting) the Mac 26 coming up in a few minutes.

 

First of all, let's add a question mark to that question...
Then, let's acknowledge the fact that Mr. Kahn's boat has done 28+ knots (that's nautical miles per hour) in winds of 34-plus. No damage, just great fun in a cold shower.
No-one conned Kahn into buying a TP52, the only con going on here is you trying to pretend you anything about the class or the technology behind sailing.
Steve

 

It was you who wrote this: "Designer Going Bankrupt ... Farr International is no more"

What on earth has this got to do with Farr Design and their situation?

I'm not playing anything. Again, your answers and comments don't make any sense at all - they're just ramblings.
I know these ratios and I maintain that not many designers use them in their daily work. I haven't, I don't and I never will - why should I?