The outrigger and proa thread

[wtarzia]

[QUOTE=peterchech;2991874]no one has answered my question about balance directly downwind with the boom over the starboard, non-ama side, creating wicked helm to port (technically weather helm) as the sail pushes the starboard of the boat and the ama drags the port side adding up to an uncontrollable boat... anyone have any ideas on what to do in this situation?QUOTE]

--- I prefer to tack downwind. The course is a little faster and it seems that the potential problems of a catastrophic gybe are reduced since the boom is always hauled in more with less arc to crash around. The slightly faster course also means that the apparent wind is reduced, so the force of gybing is a little less. The caveat is that my sails are already gybe-friendly because standing lugs are, and my sail area is small and low. Don't know what changes as boat/sail gets bigger. Or....bigger rudder!

[Gary Dierking]

no one has answered my question about balance directly downwind with the boom over the starboard, non-ama side, creating wicked helm to port (technically weather helm) as the sail pushes the starboard of the boat and the ama drags the port side adding up to an uncontrollable boat... anyone have any ideas on what to do in this situation?

One solution I came up with is... to set myself up as an atlantic proa! In this configuration the force from the sail would always be directly against the drag force from the ama, hopefully ending up in a more easily balanced boat...

Did you have the leeboard completely retracted? Just like a windsurfer, you should have it up when sailing downwind. A deep high aspect rudder and putting as much weight aft as possible will help also.

[Dan St Gean]

Did you have the leeboard completely retracted? Just like a windsurfer, you should have it up when sailing downwind. A deep high aspect rudder and putting as much weight aft as possible will help also.

My Ulua spent the first season paddle steering with a paddle (way too small) & making S shaped tracks downwind. A big paddle, or even better, a high aspect rudder makes for easier steering. You want the CLR aft & if you are really fast you can heat it up and jibe.

Dan

[peterchech]

Leeboard up, guess i have to move more weight aft. Come to think of it, once i sat way in the back of the vaka to paddlesteer, the helm seemed much to tame noticeably... ill try tacking downwind next time. To be honest i was going way faster on the gps upwind than i was on a flat out run (no tides to account for that), so maybe even my modest little boat shares that trait of multihulls and should be tacked downwind... might have helped with the swells too, or hurt...

My new sail is almost ready, prob gonna have it for the weekend... plus no overweight plcrew this weekend (unlike the last three)... im so excited to start really seeing what this boat can do...

[wtarzia]

The double outriggers that Hornell is referring to would have used bamboo amas of low buoyancy compared to the trimarans we see today. A large sail area with a bamboo ama would require a crew hiking well out to keep it from burying, like you see with the Philippine paraws. They would not be suitable for long voyages to windward in the open Pacific.

--- That's true. I had the interesting opportunity to sail on a kind of a paraw during the 2009 Everglades Challenge. The skipper took a proa hull and put two long bamboo outriggers on it, about 6 inches diameter. Unfortunately we ran into some bad luck and had to drop out that day, and the wind was very light. In the light wind the boat stood up easily. The skipper and builder, Carlos Solanilla, had built a third aft aka and strung trampoline canvas there to form nice hiking platforms about 30 inches wide and 7 feet long on each side, as some Philipine paraws have. We each took one to balance the boat for part of the day -- comfortable! I felt like The Grand Turk lounging there. A few times in better wind I sat on another bamboo to windward (pola) not as comfortable by far :-) On shore as we were disassembing the boat, I was testing those amas while the set up was in the water. With my foot on the center of one ama, I could easily sink it right down and under. I was rather shocked how easy it was. I am still very curious about how that boat would have behaved in brik wind, how much more athletic I would have had to be to keep the lee ama up (my crew role was as the intelligent meat ballast). When I have watched videos of the Philipino paraws, there always seems to be a crewperson standing out on the WW ama. -- Wade

[fjarnjak]

Hello all,

My post is a bit long, but I think it is better so you can see my thought process and can give some suggestions better...

Build experience & usage plan of a new boat:

I have built a plywood skiff FL12 design from Bateau.com (Jacques Merterns) using stitch & glue design. This was to get my feet wet and also to have a boat to have fun on the water while building a new one. Next one which I have decided to do was CK17, a 17' feet sharpie with a unstayed cat ketch rig. It is a boat of ample size for me and supplies to go cruising, it is trailable, can be single handed and can be beached where I can sleep in the tent on it overnight (or tent can be on the beach - whatever). Also, for cruising it can fit me and one more person easily. When I mean crusing I do not mean extended cruises but more beach hopping with only 1-2 nights that I need to carry food or water with me. I can easily sail to a nearby town and go to the store to resupply -> my location: Adriatic sea.

However, with my experience with FL12 along with CK17, they are displacement hulls, so CK17 top theoretical speed would be sqrt(LWL) * 2.43 which is about 5.5 knots. FL12 theoretical top speed is 4.5 knots, but in my experience when I sit aft (220lbs) and my girlfriend at the bow (approx 130 lbs ) at 3.5HP at 2/3 throttle is max we obtain and I think it is hoovering around 3-3.5 knots judging by the distance and time we cover. To island hop in my area means covering about 3-5 nautical miles on average and then you can go along the shore to wherever you want to land. Therefore, I started to look at other options since FL12 is unsafe to do longer sails with, because if bad weather hits we would be in a very bad situation. With CK17 it is very much doable and we can carry lots of supplies, but it would take 40-50 mins to do the crossing while traveling at top speeds. Loaded, it means we would need good wind, which also means slapping and pounding and is at the speed/wave/weather limit of the boat of that size to sail.

Perfect boat to fit:

1. It should be cheap and easy to construct - I do not want to have to build a boat for years; I do not want to break the budget by using some high-tech stuff or custom machined parts where a simple rope lashing can work. I also do not care about showroom ready finish.
2. It should have utility I need - safe and fast island hopping, beachable, single handed ability. Light so it is transportable by a car and launched from the beach (saves my costs!)
3. It should be "fast".
4. It should be of plywood construction and epoxy/fiberglass. Exotic wood is not easy to find here and is not cheap. I can more easily laminate iako for example from plywood and epoxy than to buy some exotic hardwood and shape it. Okume marine plywood is available; I have used it with FL12 and it works nice; did boiling tests; one piece of plywood is out on the weather now for 3rd year and looks like new....except its grayish.
5. It should be durable - I do not want to build another one and then another one and so on. So if I need to spend $100 more on a proper paint but will add to years of trouble free usage - so be it. Same with masts, etc.

Multihulls:

So I started to look at multi hulls. As I know of Wharram, I looked at this designs but opted out since there are budget constraints. I do like TIKI21 though or TIKI26. Hitia 17 is OK, but sits too low on the water. I am perfectly fine with an outrigger / proa for my budget and usage plan. No need for 2 hulls, so:

I came across Gary Dierking designs;

2 designs that would fit my bill are:
Waapu and Tamanu.

20-24 feet is an OK size to manage by myself and my building space is perfect for that size. Also bill of material is not that high so budget is met. Hulls seem easy and fast to construct. Their design speed is for 12 knots, which means I can reach my destination much much quicker than with CK17. Also in case there is no wind, it is easier and more efficient to paddle.
I wouldn't mind getting rid of the hardwood chines and use fillet + fiberglass tape instead; no need to buy hardwood; no need to be precise about joints. What do you guys think?

Waapu:

Benefit of Waapu that I see is that it is a 3-piece hull for 24 feet. I can transport it in pieces in my car and avoid the eyes of port attendant to lanuch from the beach at some more remote spot and not pay the fee. No need to buy the trailer or have to sweat by backing the trailer with my car LOL
I am not sure if 4 8mm stainless steel bolts are OK to keep all 3 pieces together in all weather conditions I may get into. 8mm ss is strong a lot, but....I think that connection would be a weak point vs. one-piece hull. Also, it doesn't have decking so I don't have dry compartments for my gear.

Tamanu:

Tamanu to me looks a bit better; has self bailing cockpits; dry storages; Only drawback is that I would have to use a trailer; Also I am not sure about light version of 4mm sides vs 6mm sides. Okume 4mm is about 13 lbs for a standard plywood sheet and 6mm is 20mm. So plywood weight difference would be about 32 lbs. But would I loose durability with 4mm sides? In any case I plan to put a 6 oz fiberglass fabric on the outside including bottom.

If I build Tamanu, I would like to do all the fittings on main hull to convert it for a double outrigger later on; but first I guess I would do the single outrigger
I can't see on the website what is the maximum load of either of the design? So I know how much weight (crew + gear) is allowed on them.

Things to think....

Also, it seems to me that Tamanu is a newer design which maybe that perhaps construction method was streamlined due to experience compared with older designs and that perhaps some things that were show to "work" were incorporated into it.

I also wonder is it possible to add shunting rig later on on Tamanu to experiment with.

So what do you guys think? And of course if you have some experience with seaworthiness, maximum loads and performances say wind speed vs. boat speed that would be nice.

[trefor]

Not related to the above posts, but there's a simple little trimaran featured on Duckworks this morning. I thought it was neat in it's simplicity. Looks easy to build and has a very simple boomless sail like a Hobie Adventure.

http://www.duckworksmagazine.com/11/...fter/index.htm

Trevor

[Dan St Gean]

Hello all,

My post is a bit long, but I think it is better so you can see my thought process and can give some suggestions better...

Build experience & usage plan of a new boat:

I have built a plywood skiff FL12 design from Bateau.com (Jacques Merterns) using stitch & glue design. This was to get my feet wet and also to have a boat to have fun on the water while building a new one. Next one which I have decided to do was CK17, a 17' feet sharpie with a unstayed cat ketch rig. It is a boat of ample size for me and supplies to go cruising, it is trailable, can be single handed and can be beached where I can sleep in the tent on it overnight (or tent can be on the beach - whatever). Also, for cruising it can fit me and one more person easily. When I mean crusing I do not mean extended cruises but more beach hopping with only 1-2 nights that I need to carry food or water with me. I can easily sail to a nearby town and go to the store to resupply -> my location: Adriatic sea.

However, with my experience with FL12 along with CK17, they are displacement hulls, so CK17 top theoretical speed would be sqrt(LWL) * 2.43 which is about 5.5 knots. FL12 theoretical top speed is 4.5 knots, but in my experience when I sit aft (220lbs) and my girlfriend at the bow (approx 130 lbs ) at 3.5HP at 2/3 throttle is max we obtain and I think it is hoovering around 3-3.5 knots judging by the distance and time we cover. To island hop in my area means covering about 3-5 nautical miles on average and then you can go along the shore to wherever you want to land. Therefore, I started to look at other options since FL12 is unsafe to do longer sails with, because if bad weather hits we would be in a very bad situation. With CK17 it is very much doable and we can carry lots of supplies, but it would take 40-50 mins to do the crossing while traveling at top speeds. Loaded, it means we would need good wind, which also means slapping and pounding and is at the speed/wave/weather limit of the boat of that size to sail.

Perfect boat to fit:

1. It should be cheap and easy to construct - I do not want to have to build a boat for years; I do not want to break the budget by using some high-tech stuff or custom machined parts where a simple rope lashing can work. I also do not care about showroom ready finish.
2. It should have utility I need - safe and fast island hopping, beachable, single handed ability. Light so it is transportable by a car and launched from the beach (saves my costs!)
3. It should be "fast".
4. It should be of plywood construction and epoxy/fiberglass. Exotic wood is not easy to find here and is not cheap. I can more easily laminate iako for example from plywood and epoxy than to buy some exotic hardwood and shape it. Okume marine plywood is available; I have used it with FL12 and it works nice; did boiling tests; one piece of plywood is out on the weather now for 3rd year and looks like new....except its grayish.
5. It should be durable - I do not want to build another one and then another one and so on. So if I need to spend $100 more on a proper paint but will add to years of trouble free usage - so be it. Same with masts, etc.

Multihulls:

So I started to look at multi hulls. As I know of Wharram, I looked at this designs but opted out since there are budget constraints. I do like TIKI21 though or TIKI26. Hitia 17 is OK, but sits too low on the water. I am perfectly fine with an outrigger / proa for my budget and usage plan. No need for 2 hulls, so:

I came across Gary Dierking designs;

2 designs that would fit my bill are:
Waapu and Tamanu.

20-24 feet is an OK size to manage by myself and my building space is perfect for that size. Also bill of material is not that high so budget is met. Hulls seem easy and fast to construct. Their design speed is for 12 knots, which means I can reach my destination much much quicker than with CK17. Also in case there is no wind, it is easier and more efficient to paddle.
I wouldn't mind getting rid of the hardwood chines and use fillet + fiberglass tape instead; no need to buy hardwood; no need to be precise about joints. What do you guys think?

Waapu:

Benefit of Waapu that I see is that it is a 3-piece hull for 24 feet. I can transport it in pieces in my car and avoid the eyes of port attendant to lanuch from the beach at some more remote spot and not pay the fee. No need to buy the trailer or have to sweat by backing the trailer with my car LOL
I am not sure if 4 8mm stainless steel bolts are OK to keep all 3 pieces together in all weather conditions I may get into. 8mm ss is strong a lot, but....I think that connection would be a weak point vs. one-piece hull. Also, it doesn't have decking so I don't have dry compartments for my gear.

Tamanu:

Tamanu to me looks a bit better; has self bailing cockpits; dry storages; Only drawback is that I would have to use a trailer; Also I am not sure about light version of 4mm sides vs 6mm sides. Okume 4mm is about 13 lbs for a standard plywood sheet and 6mm is 20mm. So plywood weight difference would be about 32 lbs. But would I loose durability with 4mm sides? In any case I plan to put a 6 oz fiberglass fabric on the outside including bottom.

If I build Tamanu, I would like to do all the fittings on main hull to convert it for a double outrigger later on; but first I guess I would do the single outrigger
I can't see on the website what is the maximum load of either of the design? So I know how much weight (crew + gear) is allowed on them.

Things to think....

Also, it seems to me that Tamanu is a newer design which maybe that perhaps construction method was streamlined due to experience compared with older designs and that perhaps some things that were show to "work" were incorporated into it.

I also wonder is it possible to add shunting rig later on on Tamanu to experiment with.

So what do you guys think? And of course if you have some experience with seaworthiness, maximum loads and performances say wind speed vs. boat speed that would be nice.

Both would be great for your uses. I built a pair of Tamanu hulls with 4mm sides (plenty strong--even 24' tri's use 4mm). They still are about 100 pounds which make it a challenge to cartop unless you have two strong guys and a beefy roof rack. However it's already put together making it the faster boat to launch. Unless you have a big van or something similar, it'll be tough to put all the pieces in a car though.

If you have the space, you could build a 24' Wa'apa with decking & think extended Tamanu. They work well as single outriggers and tris (or in my case cats). Trailering them makes more sense to me though.

Dan

[peterchech]

Hello all,

My post is a bit long, but I think it is better so you can see my thought process and can give some suggestions better...

.....................

Fjarnjak, welcome to the forum! Sei italiano?

I think if you read all the posts to this thread (I guess there are a whole lot now) many of your questions will be answered. But as far as what boat to build, I think we all agree here that outriggers give you the "most boat for your buck".

Wade, really interesting about that Paraw. I am curious as to how it stays right side up with so little buoyancy in that bamboo float? Is it like sailing a canoe, but with a slightly greater margin of safety? Does the vaka have some beam to it that aids in stability? Just seems like you gotta have some cojones to sail on one of those, especially with all the canvass and headsails they fly!

I also find it interesting that many of the recorded outrigger canoes of southeast asia flew forms of the lugsail, but I have never seen an actual picture of one.

[peterchech]

BTW Fjarjak it can be done... this was posted by me several pages back...

[wtarzia]

...Wade, really interesting about that Paraw. I am curious as to how it stays right side up with so little buoyancy in that bamboo float? Is it like sailing a canoe, but with a slightly greater margin of safety? Does the vaka have some beam to it that aids in stability? Just seems like you gotta have some cojones to sail on one of those, especially with all the canvass and headsails they fly!...

--- First, we sailed in light conditions, so I too have these questions. But the natives make them work, They may also use bamboo of greater diameter or a species that is lighter (bamboo species come in a variety of 'solidness'). Second -- we were careful wityh crew weight placement. And third, the long akas (Carlos made a beautiful curved set) make good mechanical leverage use what little buoyancy there is in the amas, so that say 40 pounds of buoyant force becomes 280 foot-pounds at the hull rotation center. More than this, I can't say! -- Wade

[trefor]

Is this the one you sailed, Wade? Found it under Miamiproas' Youtube account a while back.

http://youtu.be/GeBFKCRSNAg

I'm guessing this is the same boat, before the paraw conversion.

http://youtu.be/6QJ5ZXY2IgA

Trevor

[wtarzia]

Is this the one you sailed, Wade? Found it under Miamiproas' Youtube account a while back.

--- yes,that's it. -- Wade

[jim_cricket]

Hi folks,
I'm glad to see this thread has finally caught on! <insert smiley face icon here>. There is a lot of very cool boat building going on here, and I thought I would contribute some outrigger stuff of my own. I was doing a lot of canoe sailing back in the nineties, and got quite interested in the whole outrigger-proa thing after talking with Mark Balogh, who sailed with Russell Brown on Jzero upon a time (WB 83, with the Russ Brown article was on top of the stack at the time, too). I already had a great C Class sailing canoe, and it was easy to build and fit an outrigger to it.





I used the Gougeon tortured ply method to build the ama, designing the hull around a scale model that I glued up as per their data. The model, from 1/32" aircraft birch worked well, and taught me a lot about the method. The real hull was built from 1/8" occume, with 1/4" ply bulkheads, fir sheer clamps, and fir aka socket blocking. I built the akas as hollow box beams, with laminated ply flanges 1/2" thick, and 1/4" ply shear webs. There was solid blocking in the ends, and where the akas crossed the canoe hull. The akas fit into a socket built into the ama hull. I originally used bolts and straps to connect the akas to the canoe, but switched to all lashings later on.



I took my existing C Class sail, and added a furling jib which I also already had. Total sail area was about 70 feet. I was forced to beef up my leeboard pivot tube, from an .065 wall to a .125 wall stainless tube after putting a 90 deg. bend in the thing. Luckily home was downwind that day. My leeboard pivot arrangement works extremely well. I had used the bolt and bracket style previously, and was always annoyed with its habit of loosening or tightening depending on which side the board was carried. Fellow canoe sailor Gus Schultheiss came up with this tube arrangement (he later went on to design another pivot point at the leeboard end which allowed adjustment of angle of attack). The tube is fixed rigidly to the leeboard, and the whole business pivots inside a pair of pillow blocks, one on each side of the boat. The tension, once set, never has to be adjusted. Works great, and the tube doubles as a track for the mainsheet traveler car.



I read a comment earlier in the thread that a canoe hulled outrigger would be slow, but it was not the case with this boat at all. She was faster with the float downwind, because (I'm speculating here) the bearing on the float lifted the canoe hull somewhat, and you could drive her harder, but it was great fun to fly the float upwind, sitting out on the seat. I took the boat down to Cedar Is. N.C. and sailed in company with Windrider tris. Nobody sailed away from me. I suffered a little from lee helm problems. The ama should have been 14 or 15 feet long, instead of the 12' I built, and with the ama bow further forward. The ama had plenty of displacement, about 200# if I remember my calculations correctly. It was just too short.



I moved on to other boats, larger multis, etc. but I'm back building small traditional boats (couldn't afford the big one). I never finished the outrigger thing, not by a long shot, and I'm tempted to take up with the design where I left off. All the talk has me antsy!
Jim L.

[peterchech]

Hi Jim! You wouldn't have the plans or drawings for that tortured ply ama would you? I am thinking about building one, same design but maybe stretch it to 18 feet...

[jim_cricket]

I do Peter. It would be easy to stretch it out, but you might want to add to the height of the sheer for a hull of that length. I have construction photos which need to be uploaded to my website, and I'll put some up here if there is any interest. I may be able to create a .pdf of the drawings.
Jim

[Dan St Gean]

I do Peter. It would be easy to stretch it out, but you might want to add to the height of the sheer for a hull of that length. I have construction photos which need to be uploaded to my website, and I'll put some up here if there is any interest. I may be able to create a .pdf of the drawings.
Jim

Looks good Jim! I am messing with a bit double Tamanu project right now, but I was also inspired by the duckworks article today. I emailed Wade a list of things I think I'd want in a small tri like Mark G's. Lots of cool things to glean from all the small tri development going on right now.

I admire your commitment to keeping things light on your canoe!

Dan

[peterchech]

Yeah id really appreciate the drawings jim as i've never done tortured ply and i kind of feel like im groping in the dark

[fjarnjak]

Both would be great for your uses. I built a pair of Tamanu hulls with 4mm sides (plenty strong--even 24' tri's use 4mm). They still are about 100 pounds which make it a challenge to

100lbs is OK to push/handle with muscle power; I guess I can use my existing trailer which is made for flat bottom boat.

So between 4mm and 6mm plywood in that boat there is no difference? In terms of durability or? I mean, why isn't 4mm standard then?

If you have the space, you could build a 24' Wa'apa with decking & think extended Tamanu. They work well as single outriggers and tris (or in my case cats). Trailering them makes more sense to me though.

I guess first I will build as designed and later if I wanna build another hull to make a cat I may do it. But I want to try outrigger first

[fjarnjak]

Fjarnjak, welcome to the forum! Sei italiano?

Thanks. I am from Croatia; other side of Adriatic

I think if you read all the posts to this thread (I guess there are a whole lot now) many of your questions will be answered. But as far as what boat to build, I think we all agree here that outriggers give you the "most boat for your buck".

I have read 80% of this thread and I agree; did some calculations and outriggers give best value.

[Dan St Gean]

BTW Fjarjak it can be done... this was posted by me several pages back...

Most anything can be moved by boat. It's the time spent loading, unloading, assembling, disassembling, loading, and unloading that get disheartening.

Dan

[Dan St Gean]

Sure there's a difference. I went with 4mm for light weight & 6mm bottom and top for durability, as I don't beach on the hull sides nor walk on them. You could go all 4mm if you want for a really light build, but it won't be as durable--and I didn't really like the 3 ply 4mm I had for trustworthiness in the event of rocks, oysters, or something sharp. I prefer the decked boat, but Gary, who has much more experience than I do, prefers the open boat. I'd say build the boat that makes the most sense to you. Long and lean is nice though!

Dan

[peterchech]

100lbs is OK to push/handle with muscle power; I guess I can use my existing trailer which is made for flat bottom boat.

So between 4mm and 6mm plywood in that boat there is no difference? In terms of durability or? I mean, why isn't 4mm standard then?



I guess first I will build as designed and later if I wanna build another hull to make a cat I may do it. But I want to try outrigger first

Yeah I would def build in 4mm okoume. Keeping this boat light is crucial if you plan on moving it to and from the beach by yourself. I built of 6 mm fir, and it is about 450#. Those bulkheads and bolts really add up. Even with beach wheels it really takes two people to move this boat around on shore. Even if building light only saves you 10% on weight, that 45 pounds can make a big difference.

Unless you plan on paddling alot, I would recomend adding a couple inches freeboard to the wa'apa. Tamanu already has more freeboard. I have yet to have Wa'apa's gunwhales under in any circumstances, but it would be a drier boat with a couple inches extra. Also go for a high volume ama for sure, and consider a tamanu-like transom to hang a rudder off of if you plan on tacking the boat. Steering oar works fine, and really helps you tack, but can get tiring after a few hours. Tamanu already has these features.

One more thing, the beauty of Wa'apa is that you can add length to the boat. Gary says as much, and it is true, that "nothing contributes more to comfort at sea than waterline length". It costs almost nothing to make the boat 8 feet longer, and gary seems to think a 32' vaka is possible. Talk about bang for the buck!

[peterchech]

Sure there's a difference. I went with 4mm for light weight & 6mm bottom and top for durability, as I don't beach on the hull sides nor walk on them. You could go all 4mm if you want for a really light build, but it won't be as durable--and I didn't really like the 3 ply 4mm I had for trustworthiness in the event of rocks, oysters, or something sharp. I prefer the decked boat, but Gary, who has much more experience than I do, prefers the open boat. I'd say build the boat that makes the most sense to you. Long and lean is nice though!

Dan

Gary prefers the open boat? Do you know why?

[Dan St Gean]

I agree with Peter. I like a bit of freeboard, light hulls, long waterlines, rudder steering, and being able to launch quickly. Trailers give you that quick launch ability. I like Peter's ama design too, although I'd have built the ama with a 45 degree bottom to slice through chop. On occasion, I even scheme of addign a v shaped false bottom to the tamanu to eliminate upwind slap--even though there's not much. Not really going to happen, but it's fun to dream.

Dan

[Dan St Gean]

Gary prefers the open boat? Do you know why?

Nope--just that the two times he's built Tamanu hulls in Fiji that's what he's done. Perhaps he'll be by to weight in?
Dan

[fjarnjak]

Yeah I would def build in 4mm okoume. Keeping this boat light is crucial if you plan on moving it to and from the beach by yourself. I built of 6 mm fir, and it is about 450#.

Only marine plywood I have available here is okume and meranti. I plan to build in okume since it is significantly lighter and when I look at price difference it is not that much in the grand scheme of things.

I plan to sleep on the beach so boat will be on pebbles (we don't have fine sandy beaches here) so I plan to do 6mm bottom and fiberglass with epoxy both bottom and sides from the outside with a light 4 oz fiberglass cloth.

So I wonder about 4mm vs 6mm sides. Weight saving is definitely something I would like to do; 450lbs is too much to handle by myself - is it complete boat assembled and ready to go or just the hull you are talking about at 450lbs?

But what is the drawback of having 4mm sides?

I do have some fiberglass tape left over, so I am thinking it wouldn't hurt to add some at the bottom to side junction & at the stem.

[Dan St Gean]

But what is the drawback of having 4mm sides?

I do have some fiberglass tape left over, so I am thinking it wouldn't hurt to add some at the bottom to side junction & at the stem.

4mm is lots lighter. Unless you plan on ramming things with your topsides 4mm is plenty--especially glassed. I like the additional freeboard of the Tamanu, but you can build the Wa'apa with 24" panels just as easily as the Tamanu. The guys that called themselves team RAF built a Wa'apa at 24' in one boat rather than sectional which is lighter as well. Box beams are lighter than laminated ones. Not decking the whole thing (as much as it pains me to say it ;-)...) is also lighter. Being able to drag the boat up the beach is pretty important. Perhaps a set of beach wheels like beachcats use could be broken down and stored under your seat? keeping everything in drybags lashed in is also a good way to make it easy to lighten the load--take them out when you land, put all your stuff in a pile, and then drag or roll the boat up the beach. Is ther predominantly light air in the Adriatic? Heavy? If there's some challenging conditions you might get caught in, I'd lean towards decking more of the boat even if it makes it heavier.

Dan

[Gary Dierking]

Gary prefers the open boat? Do you know why?

I built the Tamanus in Fiji for fishing under sail. When you gaff a 4' barracuda and bring it on board, you need a place to throw him and prevent him from flipping overboard again. The open hull was best for this. From a pure safety point of view, more decking or self bailing cockpits are the way to go. My open hulls still had water tight compartments fore and aft but would have taken a good bit of time to bail if I had had a full capsize.

Gary

[fjarnjak]

Is ther predominantly light air in the Adriatic? Heavy? If there's some challenging conditions you might get caught in, I'd lean towards decking more of the boat even if it makes it heavier.

It is OK but when it becomes nasty, it becomes so suddenly, gets high waves, but lasts for a short time (summer season) then back to being OK. So decked boat & possibly a safety ama is what I am aiming at. Maybe I do trimaran option (Tamanu) so I can decide each season which option to put on the water I will go with single outrigger first.

All the winds are here if someone wants to read....

http://croatia.aventin.hr/jedrenje/weather.htm

http://sailing-croatia.blogspot.com/...tips-wind.html

For summer:

Maestral
Maestral is a typical Adriatic summer northwestern wind and one of those winds that are characteristic for beautiful and stable weather. After the morning calm, almost always around noon during summer begins its pleasant circulation that can last, with increases, to dusk. The maestral can reach force 5 to 6 winds, while areas where this wind is most common are the Zadar and Korcula channels.

It is almost as though the maestral was created for pleasant and carefree sailing without maneuvering because its force is constant and its nature is predictable and mild. While the bura and jugo, each in their own way, offer yachtsmen excitement and challenge, the maestral guarantees pure pleasure during which you can enjoy in the sea without any worries. Due to the fact that, at sunset, the necessary conditions for the creation of the maestral disappear, at the first sign of darkness, a gentle night force 3 breeze starts to blow from the mainland to give way at sunrise to a calm sea that will, on a regular basis, once again around noon be replaced by the refreshing maestral.

Even though the Adriatic sea does not belong to seas that are dangerous and unpredictable, and sailing can take place all year round, nevertheless, the most favorable conditions are from mid-June to mid-October when even those with little experience can enjoy in sea adventures.

So about 10-15 knots wind is from noonish to about 6PM. However, if you are out there and it changes (say 1x in 2 weeks), be ready for a wild ride. It can go up to 35+ knots easily; and then next day calm and nice as usual. So I am thinking to devise some reefing system in the sails to reef underway.

Can the sail be modifed to have reef points, again Tamanu design, so I release top halyard, I have ropes 1/3 up the sail (from the boom) hanging so I lower the sail towards boom, and tie them around, and tension top halyard again? It would need only one pulley on the top of the mast and one small cleat at the mast base. Sail can still be lashed to the mast, so no hardware needed there.

Something like:

[Gary Dierking]

I built one Tamanu with 6mm sides and one with 4mm. The only disadvantage of the 4mm that I could see was that in the right light you can see faint ridges at the bulkhead locations. The 6mm is considerable stiffer and faired itself better when bent around the bulkheads.

Gary

[Gary Dierking]

Also go for a high volume ama for sure, and consider a tamanu-like transom to hang a rudder off of if you plan on tacking the boat. Steering oar works fine, and really helps you tack, but can get tiring after a few hours.

I have not had any difficulties tacking my Wa'apa with the side rudder either sailing alone or with four on board. You will note that it is harder to tack turning away from your ama than towards it, because you are dragging the ama through the eye of the wind. A larger ama (like yours) will make this even harder. Also when using a rudder with a light multihull it is important to use very little angle. Slamming the helm over as is done on monohulls will stop you dead in your tracks and the tack will stall. You must also be sure that you are making your best speed at as close an angle to the wind as possible. Wait for a puff.
If your rig is non standard, your leeboard might be in the wrong spot.
With my recent experiments with cambered junk rigs, I moved the leeboard forward and for an unknown reason it is tacking quicker than before, but I'm not sure if it's the junk sail with its area forward of the mast or the new location of the leeboard.
Note that with the Wa'apa or the Tamanu with their single bolt leeboard mounts, it is an easy job to have more mounting locations. Just glue in a 3/4" x 3" piece of timber or ply extending from the gunwale to the chine or cockpit floor.

Gary

[Dan St Gean]

I have not had any difficulties tacking my Wa'apa with the side rudder either sailing alone or with four on board. You will note that it is harder to tack turning away from your ama than towards it, because you are dragging the ama through the eye of the wind. A larger ama (like yours) will make this even harder. Also when using a rudder with a light multihull it is important to use very little angle. Slamming the helm over as is done on monohulls will stop you dead in your tracks and the tack will stall. You must also be sure that you are making your best speed at as close an angle to the wind as possible. Wait for a puff.
If your rig is non standard, your leeboard might be in the wrong spot.
With my recent experiments with cambered junk rigs, I moved the leeboard forward and for an unknown reason it is tacking quicker than before, but I'm not sure if it's the junk sail with its area forward of the mast or the new location of the leeboard.
Note that with the Wa'apa or the Tamanu with their single bolt leeboard mounts, it is an easy job to have more mounting locations. Just glue in a 3/4" x 3" piece of timber or ply extending from the gunwale to the chine or cockpit floor.

Gary

Gary,

Thanks for participating in these forums! You are a wealth of information.

Dan

[JimD]

I-beam iakos, anyone? I'll be using 1"x3" fir for iakos. Any thoughts on whether it would be stronger/better to make an I-beam out of three lengths of fir or just laminate them together? Seems like about the same amount of work either way. I also have some very stout 2x3 fir that could be used as is, no messing with glue or laminations. These will be to support 12 foot outriggers on a 15 foot hull that can be set up either with one outrigger as a proa or both as a tri.

[Grzegorz]

BTW Fjarjak it can be done... this was posted by me several pages back...

that`s true - you can do it:

but trailer is better. this year i decided to buy one after last year experience. I was so tired after cartopping and unloading...
Grzegorz

[Gary Dierking]

but trailer is better. this year i decided to buy one after last year experience. I was so tired after cartopping and unloading...
Grzegorz

I agree. You can cartop almost anything but it's a big job putting it all together. This is my favorite trailer with a steel pipe frame standing up on the centerline.
Gary

[jim_cricket]

I-beam iakos, anyone? I'll be using 1"x3" fir for iakos. Any thoughts on whether it would be stronger/better to make an I-beam out of three lengths of fir or just laminate them together? Seems like about the same amount of work either way. I also have some very stout 2x3 fir that could be used as is, no messing with glue or laminations. These will be to support 12 foot outriggers on a 15 foot hull that can be set up either with one outrigger as a proa or both as a tri.

My experience with I beams was that they do not resist torsional loads nearly as well as "boxes", either hollow and closed or just plain solid. We compared an I beam section to a box section, and there is no comparison. The I beam twisted like crazy, and the hollow box not at all. Consider the pitching that a float hull undergoes, and that you want your cross beams to resist that twisting load. My 2 cents worth.
Jim L.

[JimD]

My experience with I beams was that they do not resist torsional loads nearly as well as "boxes", either hollow and closed or just plain solid. We compared an I beam section to a box section, and there is no comparison. The I beam twisted like crazy, and the hollow box not at all. Consider the pitching that a float hull undergoes, and that you want your cross beams to resist that twisting load. My 2 cents worth.
Jim L.

That's about what my intuition told me, too. I will likely just go with solid.

[jim_cricket]

I've had these photos on my computer for a few years, and have never found out much about this boat, except that it is a class of outrigger on Raratonga.





Does anyone have any info on this boat? Sail area, etc. Derivation. They look like plywood renditions of an historical type. I like the vaka hull. What is the function of the bow/forefoot extension? I looked through Canoes of Oceania and didn't find anything quite like this. Looks like a nice boat.





I've always been curious.
Jim L.

[Gary Dierking]

I've had these photos on my computer for a few years, and have never found out much about this boat, except that it is a class of outrigger on Raratonga.





Does anyone have any info on this boat? Sail area, etc. Derivation. They look like plywood renditions of an historical type. I like the vaka hull. What is the function of the bow/forefoot extension? I looked through Canoes of Oceania and didn't find anything quite like this. Looks like a nice boat.

I've always been curious.
Jim L.

Those look like some photos I took almost 10 years ago, when I was able to crew in one of their races. There were four or more built of the 18' Tangaroa class and they still race at the sailing club in Rarotonga. Most were built by Thomas Koteka. He has a Facebook page so you may be able to get more info from him:
http://www.facebook.com/people/Thoma...eka/1160704706

[jim_cricket]

Those look like some photos I took almost 10 years ago, when I was able to crew in one of their races. There were four or more built of the 18' Tangaroa class and they still race at the sailing club in Rarotonga. Most were built by Thomas Koteka. He has a Facebook page so you may be able to get more info from him:
http://www.facebook.com/people/Thoma...eka/1160704706

Wow, I thought you might know something, but never would have realized these were your photos. I have no idea where I got them from! I'll check out Thomas' facebook page. Thanks very much Gary.
Jim L

[AnalogKid]

I posted a photo of one on JimD's Outriggers for Kayak thread:



I was in Raro last March and one of my travelling companions told me that the rig used was from the Idle-Along class of New Zealand dinghy. The picture below seems to back that up, but I can't remember how he found out. I suspect he was chatting to the sailors while I was snorkelling with the kids. I more pictures of those Rarotongan outriggers somewhere, if any one is interested.

[slidercat]

On the other hand, Thomas Firth Jones used I-beams on all his later designs, and they held up fine to trans-Atlantic crossings, and strong gales.

I used I-beams on Slipper, my 14' cartop cat, and they are fine too. They are not made completely of solid lumber, however. The webs are 1/4 inch ply, with the cap strips of 3/4 " solid stock glued to either side, so that the edges of the web are sandwiched between the cap strips. I cut away much of the web, to lighten the beams, and they seem to be very strong.

It's possible that some of the reputation I-beams have for torsional weakness results from testing them individually. I'm no structural engineer, but to my uneducated eye, the two I-beams used in a typical multihull seem to work together in some manner to resist torsion, to a larger degree than the simple additive resistance of two beams.

I agree that box beams are stronger, but one great advantage of I-beams is that there is no hidden interior where moisture can collect, and rot start.

[jim_cricket]

I believe the Wharram cats use I beams as well. But I also think there is quite a difference in structure between a cat's proportionally larger, and better supported beams, and the outrigger's longer and much lighter beams. But either way, there is not a huge force on a light, small outrigger. You like your I beams, and I like my boxes.
Jim

[JimD]

Interesting:

[JimD]

Anyone have experience on this proa setup with the second ama much closer to the main hull, and often smaller than the principal ama? Advantages? Disadvantages? Obviously it makes for somewhat beamier, heavier boat. But with added protection against capsize. Presumably the boat is not intended to sail on the small one.

[JimD]

Been watching some of these vids again http://hawaiianx.com/

[Dan St Gean]

Anyone have experience on this proa setup with the second ama much closer to the main hull, and often smaller than the principal ama? Advantages? Disadvantages? Obviously it makes for somewhat beamier, heavier boat. But with added protection against capsize. Presumably the boat is not intended to sail on the small one.

All of the HSCA canoes have that setup. Essentially it's a tacking outrigger with a "safety ama" to help prevent ama to windward capsizes. Gary's got one on his Ulua as I remember as well.

Dan

[wtarzia]

I wonder if someone invented the safety ama (sort of, you know what I mean) then applied it to the sometimes dangerous open water OC racing, or if a series of racing accidents made race officials invent and insist on the safety ama? I am going to try one for my single-outrigger making use of one of my inflatable amas from the Everglades Challenge trimaran conversion (perfect for this use -- they are light thus easily man-handled and quickly rigged at the launch site). I want to use my 114 square foot balanced lug more regularly, and a safety ama might be useful because I hate reefing a lug sail, can't think of anything messier or uglier than a reefed lugsail. -- Wade

[Gary Dierking]

Anyone have experience on this proa setup with the second ama much closer to the main hull, and often smaller than the principal ama? Advantages? Disadvantages? Obviously it makes for somewhat beamier, heavier boat. But with added protection against capsize. Presumably the boat is not intended to sail on the small one.

It's a step between a single outrigger and a double. You get most of the anti-capsize advantage of a double outrigger but you can still come alongside a floating dock and load gear or crew.