I normally would not respond to anonymous postings on design matters, but
whoever "dlicata1"' might be made some points that do need a response.

> A cheap boat can only be light if you use less materials because you
> aren't allowed to use expensive materials. Luckily, this builds on
> itself. The lighter the boat, the smaller/lighter/cheaper the rig
> is, the smaller/ligher/cheaper the sails are, the
> samller/ligher/cheaper the winches are etc.

The problem is it is a cheap boat, and no matter how good the design there
is a point at which taking off more material will threaten the boat's
structural viability. Having four burly guys out on the windward float for
instance can load up the rig the same as adding up to 1200lb to the overall
weight. There's no escaping that. So unless one knows that there will never
be four guys on the windward float, then one is taking a huge risk in
marketing a fragile boat.

One also needs a minimum skin thickness on the outer laminate just to resist
abrasion and point loading. Make this thinner/lighter/cheaper or whatever
you want to call it, and your 30K boat could end up looking like a golf
ball, or a threadbare carpet.

> the offset
> sliding beams, the SAS system, is an economical alternative on a
> SMALL boat. Furthermore you can't fit full enough floats for the L7
> using the Farrier system. The BIG compromise of not using the
> Farrier system is cabin space. The cabin cannot be 8 feet wide and
> it has the boxes for the front beams running through it as well.

If one is prepared to accept telescopic beams, and little room, and want a
cheap boat, then perhaps one of the earlier telescopic catamarans should be
considered. They are even cheaper, and, better still, offer twin coffin
accommodation (can sleep 4). Only downside is trailerability did not work
out too well, and I still have a vivid memory of the one I saw on the beach
in Brisbane, with 4 burly guys around it, all shaking like mad trying to get
the hulls to slide in. It was the local dealer's boat as well. Sand and salt
seem to have respect for no one, and galling can be a permanent scar.

>  Therefore it was possible to reduce a common complaint
> people had about folding tri's pounding to weather by making a finer
> entry for the main hull.

F-boat owners should check out the actual area under the bow that will pound
on occasion. Then go down to the local marina and compare the same area on
modern monohull sailboat racers. Then you will see what can really pound.
I've never yet found a boat that will not pound to some degree to windward,
from dinghies right through to powerboats, but the narrow flat area on the
forward part of my designs is one of the smallest.

The alternative is of course to make it very Veed, allowing the bow to
plunge right down unimpeded. That is also called hobby horsing.

> Furthermore
> it was probably the driest boat in the fleet on the way back from
> Catalina in the race a few weeks ago because the floats are so
> buoyant.

I've ridden on an F-27 coming back from Catalina doing 15 knots or more and
never got wet either. The trick is to let the mainsail out to where it
should be so that one is sailing flat. If pressed, one will get some spray
from the aft beam, but this can be prevented by sewing a flap onto the aft
nets that laps over the outer part of the beam, and is held down by
shockcord. This then traps any such spray and deflects it down, sorta like
the F-33 beams now do.

Having the main in too tight is actually a common problem, as per Hank
Book's posting. If your boat will not bear off to leeward then your
mainsheet is too tight. You will go faster and flatter by letting it out. I
have gone out on people's boats who were complaining they could never get
over 10 or 11 knots and the boat would not steer very well. They were amazed
at the transformation after I let their main out.

Ian Farrier

Farrier Marine, Inc.


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
click here
Web Bug from http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=298184.5285298.6392945.3001176/D=groups/S=:HM/A=2368837/rand=486615561


Yahoo! Groups Links

Reply via email to