I didn't check the Tornado or Misquito's time to Key West the end of the EC. You would have to correct the Mosquito time for the late start. Of course they were starting with a completely untried boat so this would be a little unfair to Misquito since the Tornado was well tried with a very competitive crew.
Still would be interesting comparison.
How long and wide was Tridarka?
Yep. The 25 was basically the prototype for all the larger Searunners. It had cabins forward and aft. One option had a smaller cockpit and a larger cabin forward, the other option had a very large cockpit and a small cabin forward. When I bought mine it was the "blue water" version with the smaller cockpit. I converted it to the coastal cruiser setup.PS -- Was the Searunner 25 large enough to have the center cockpit and double cabins, each end?
This isn't a small boat, and setup and launch are more of a hassle than virtually all of the newer designs. A very attractive update on the concept is Marples DC-3, which is a much simpler build and can be opened and folded on the water. But that too, is too big to belong in this thread.
This CLC 17 fitted with the sailing rig and outriggers seems to be sailing well and perhaps should be considered if requiring a minimalist tri. Plans to convert any kayak, or possibly canoe are just $69. http://www.clcboats.com/shop/boats/w...iling-rig.html
Last edited by keyhavenpotterer; 04-18-2012 at 04:38 AM.
has this Little Wing video been posted yet?
Cruising World video review http://www.cruisingworld.com/sailboa...iling-trimaran
Last edited by keyhavenpotterer; 04-18-2012 at 04:17 AM.
Both the CLC SailRig and the Little Wing seem very interesting from a good sailing, minimalist boat. I did read that at a recent EC a Little Wing owner went out for a test sail in some waves came back saying he was underwater a lot of the time and packed up and went home. However the concept is the same as the Hobies AI so it might have been the owner or the specific situation. The CLC is generally talked about having difficulty tacking, which could be fixed. Choosing a bigger vaka (main hull) would probably make this more "seaworthy".
On the other end of the spectrum, there's some talk of the Marples DC3 which might be off the end of the size spectrum for this thread. However, the limit should not be on length IMHO since the HSCA sailing canoes and Holopuni have lots to recommend them.
There's always going to be a trade-off between comfort and performance. Even very large tris built for speed douse their crews with water when the waves pick up. Wave piercing hulls are inherently faster than the older high-buoyancy types, but you pay a price if it's not a very hot day.
It's my opinion that the comparison should stand as it was shown on the course and let the whole thing speak for itself. Wanna start late because of fiddly bits that need fixing, or there's bad weather that you'd rather avoid?... then absorb those realities into the overall performance of the entry. Sorry to say this, but the trimaran folks knew the start time and just didn't bring it 'round. New boats take time to sort, so perhaps they might have started a week, or two, earlier? Seasoned crew vs a first effort..? Hey, isn't that the way it goes in life? Why should the EC function be any different? If one wishes to measure one's capabilities against the best, then bring the challenge straight away and let the event sort the results.
Example: Ray Aldridge chose to withdraw his catamaran from the EC due to weather, how it might affect his boat and he and his crew. Good enough, but there aren't any comparisons to be made versus other boats that did start and subsequently finish on time and in good style. Ray's boat remains an unknown quantity as to suitability for the EC and it's as simple as that. Maybe Ray can bring it back when the weather is nicer and have a go. I'm sure that others out there are scheming for that very scenario as we write these posts.
This event, concocted by Steve Isaac, has the unique ability to dramatically cull the herd when it comes to coastal adventure boaters who are capable and boats that are best suited for the conditions. I kinda like it when a butt-kicking storm front rolls through the fleet as they pick their way down the coast of Florida. You very quickly discover who has it going on and who doesn't. It's very much like the conditions one might find on a personal adventure trip along a far away coast. Lots of boats can do well in sanitary, dialed-in conditions that favor their design capabilities. The same is true for the sailors who are game as heck when the sun shines and the breezes are fair. Toss in a crusty test by having a go in rough conditions and the whole leader board can change in an instant.
Well Chris, we were talking about the comparison between a tri and a well known cat with proved performance trying to understand the benefits and strengths of the two boats.
So ignoring the rhetoric about ADVENTURE did you have something to say about the two boats? I agree the performance on the course should count, but you can't measure performance in elapsed time when one starts a day late.
This wasn't a question about the EC, it was about two boats. Unfair as the comparison might be given the difference in preparation and crew.
Much as I agree about the value of heavy weather in separating the quality of the boats (and seamen/ persons), you commented on the wrong issue. There are plenty of EC threads.
Last edited by upchurchmr; 04-18-2012 at 01:35 PM.
Dave, What about the Drifter 16 ? For what you are looking for it fits the bill.
I did not have the building skills or budget for it but did have an old Laser rig so I built my E15. These hull shapes, with a lee-board seem to go to windward very well.
As to comparing a day late effort to a pair of guys who played by the rules as entitled... One can make any comparison one wishes. It was the crew of the tri who decided to start a day late. Nobody forced them to do so. Others went as planned and scheduled, so it's on the tri crew alone for how and when they chose to start. I am curious, though, as to why you have become so rah-rah defensive about the trimaran team. Whining about their "late to the game" effort and then adding insult to the Tornado crew for, once again, having the best boat and team on the water is goofy. When the tri gets to the start on time, they are ready for a proper go at the Tornado team, then you can make the comparisons without the excuses. Right now, it sounds like sour grapes and is functionally irrelevant.
Come on, Bubba, it's over and it isn't going to change anything. Man-up, get prepared for next year (if one cares to do it again) and leave the start beach on time with a functional boat that has no loose ends. Geez, is it really that difficult?
That said, I wonder how the Mosquito would do in the same race. I gotta imagine the T would have the edge in shorter courses due to it's lighter weight. With no provision to sleep aboard a T, I beleive the longer course would start to favor the Mosquito--if it had enough boatspeed to not allow shore rest for it's rival. Anyhow it's just online questions unless the Mosquito enters an EC next year after sorting their early teething issues. I remember Randy's Sizzors had similar issues in it's first two attempts--and then went on to win in record time in it's third go. Tuning sure has advantages! Even Ben and Emily tuned up the XCR from a DNF last year into a very solid performance this year and that included a new rig if I remember correctly.
Not wood but it could be...
Similar in some respects to Mosquito btw.
Flash harry foiler.
Chris O's Europa design
Could we speculate how it would do against a Tornado?
Last edited by John Bell; 04-18-2012 at 03:58 PM.
The same guy attempted the EC solo in a Hobie 16 this year. After a capsize in Sarasota Bay, he dropped out. Id rather do it in a Tridarka, myself!
OK, so let's speculate, seeing as the E20 has not been built as of yet. Here's the link to the article describing the boat in detail, complete with some links to vertical strip foam building techniques to show that the process is not that difficult for a guy who has already built a boat, or two. http://www.lunadadesign.com/europa-2...-trimaran.html
Built in carbon cloth, the E20 could be ready to sail in the low 400 pound region for all-up weight. It would be less expensive in glass laminates with a weight offset as the major adjustment to the final product. I expect the boat to be powerful upwind and especially quick when making use of offwind angles. Because of its enhanced righting moment due to beam width over a trailered beach cat, it should carry sail further into the upper wind regions than a cat, giving it significant advantages. The boat has a comfortable cockpit area that could be useful for crew rest. To that end, I would suggest a collapsible dodger just aft of the mast with tapering side curtains to keep the resting crew dry and warm. I'd further equip the boat with ultra light weight seats on the aft end of each side trampoline surface that have fold-down backs to keep the wind drag to a minimum. These seats would give the skipper more comfort and allow for a bent leg stance while driving for longer periods.
The amas are modeled after those seen on the Maxi-tri, Sodeb'O. They have wave piercing bows only at the forward ends. This allows the boat to be driven more aggressively with reduced hobby-horse pitching moments. The volume of the bows has been flipped top for bottom to maintain the forward reserve buoyancy needed to resist pitch-poling moments. Immediately aft of the wave piercing feature, the amas open up to provide full, offshore style reserve buoyancy at 200% of displacement. Experienced sailors will be able to push the boat quite hard without fear of tossing it over.
I would not suggest that owners of this type of boat put it to the crucible of trying to push hard in any race before they know the machine. Instead, I would suggest that the crew embark on a regimen of regular sailing sessions in a wide variety of weather and sea states so that the sweet spot can be fully understood before pressing the boat in a competitive environment. For example... What does it take to fly the main hull so that it is just kissing the surface and how easily can it be held in that state without the danger of capsize. At that point, I think that a skilled crew that has gotten to know the boat and its quirks, will be able to put this ride up at the front of the EC, doing battle with Sew Sew and Lumpy.
Paddling this machine would be about as easy as it is to paddle the Tornado, which isn't very easy compared to other boats where the paddling function has been included as a major component of the design strategy. If the wind is cooking, then this boat should be a serious threat, If the wind dies, then it's going to be one ugly slog to Key Largo. Dead air could provide for the interesting scenario of all the sail rigged Krugers, Hobie AI's and the XCR's going right past the likes of the Tornado, Randy Smyth's tri and the Europa 20. There might be a bit of salvation if the side tramps could be rolled out of the way, the rig struck and the crew gets to hammering with paddles on each side of the main hull. Other than that, it's all about the wind for boats of this type.
[QUOTE=Chris Ostlind;3383179]Sorry, but I only worked off of your comments from several posts earlier, as well as the quoted text, where it was you who mentioned the EC.
The EC was only mentioned to point out the specific boats
As they say in court my friend, you opened the door.
I'd like to close it if you don't mind. This was a simple thread about the available small triamarans.
Just because you don't like what came through after you did so, doesn't remove its value. Go take a scan back through the posts and see how many references you, personally, have made to the EC. That should get you rolling on the right track here. So, unless you are willing to chastise yourself and then have the WB folks remove all mention of the EC in the thread, it looks like it's here to stay.
As to comparing a day late effort to a pair of guys who played by the rules as entitled... One can make any comparison one wishes.
Boats, I was only talking about the boats, and how difficult it is to actually compare the value of the boats.
It was the crew of the tri who decided to start a day late. Nobody forced them to do so. Others went as planned and scheduled, so it's on the tri crew alone for how and when they chose to start. I am curious, though, as to why you have become so rah-rah defensive about the trimaran team. Whining about their "late to the game" effort and then adding insult to the Tornado crew for, once again, having the best boat and team on the water is goofy. When the tri gets to the start on time, they are ready for a proper go at the Tornado team, then you can make the comparisons without the excuses. Right now, it sounds like sour grapes and is functionally irrelevant.
Come on, Bubba, it's over and it isn't going to change anything. Man-up, get prepared for next year (if one cares to do it again) and leave the start beach on time with a functional boat that has no loose ends. Geez, is it really that difficult?
It really is not that difficult. Stay on track. Different boats, what are they? Not macho chest beating about something neither you or I did this year. Actually never for myself, I don't know about you.
Perhaps I should bring up #71. This looks a lot like what you accused Ray Aldridge of - pushing his own professional products. At least his had been built.
How about you and I just stop posting to this thread and let everyone else get back to the nice simple fun of pointing out the small trimarans available.
I'm not going to list my sailing CV on these pages. Suffice to say that I have done significant coastal adventure cruises in the past, both sailing and paddling, will do more in the future and have a solid grasp as to what it takes to do so successfully.
Thanks for the suggestion, but I'm not about to withdraw from a topic where I have considerable knowledge, simply because you put it forth. If it's product credibility you seek in order for me to justify my presence here, then take a look at the accomplishments of Ben and Emily Algera, who sailed and paddled one of my boat designs to a class victory in this recent EC. They didn't walk away from the adventure when faced with an approaching front. They, like many others, pushed off. The XCR led the Class 3 mob down the coast until they opted to take their boat through a huge portion of the Everglades (a good deal more than the Nightmare section) and completed the course in the time allotted. Ray's boat never left the beach, much less demonstrated that it could actually complete an EC intact. I'm not down on Ray for that, He made his choice and that's that. But as far as proof of concept because it is built, as you suggest... perhaps you will recognize that a great design that safely and swiftly conveys its crew to the intended goal is a whole lot more accomplished than a boat that never attempts the route, built, or not?
And still will be as I'm sure we've only scratched the surface of small tris. Perhaps a good time to mention Joe F but together a great blog over at www.smalltrimarans.com
I see the similarity with the Drifter series. This seems to be the sort of boat Dan is contemplating, pretty small but the option for a passenger and reasonable freeboard.
If I were to build a Drifter it would be the 12 or 12L (longer amas), as I would like as light as possible: easy to lift onto cartop and trolley the whole deal across the sand to the water. My target is sub 100lb all up! so that has to be a tiny tri. A rough weight budget based on a generic ply kayak hull plus pieces of my current outrigger canoe (18') as safe estimates:
Item kg lb Hull 18 40 Amas 9 20 Akas 4 9 Rudder 2 4 Sail 8 18 Total 41 91
This says I could pull it off! As has been pointed out this could be a wet ride, but I'd be mostly on local lakes, fair weather, air temps above 10 deg C.
Back to your boat: can you tell us a bit more? any interesting details of design, construction, sailing. I like the Dierking-esque ama attachment. Do you have a leeboard or centreboard? Solid or box beam akas?
Finally the article linked to mentions Sanginet, France . I've sat on the edge of that lake, and swum in it! In 2000 I was based in a tiny village (Salles), working in an even more obscure location (Pierroton), between Bordeaux and Arcachon. We were there for the summer which us kiwis found pretty hot, so in true kiwi fashion we headed for water as often as we could, getting to know local lakes and beaches quite well, our kids were just 4 and 6 at the time. So cool to be reminded of of our stay there.
a plus tard, Dave
What if I like paddling, but I like sailing more? Could the compromises be inverted - a purpose optimised sailing vaka that is appropriate for occasional, "sub-optimal" fun unplugged paddling? What would you change in the hull shape? Would it be worth bothering?
I have to say that I've been doodling a little tri lately. I know, I like cats better, but... I have this nice Nacra 5.2 rig. I decided it just wasn't big enough for the 23 foot cat I've half built, so I've been casting around for a better platform. Since my focus is cruising, any boat I stick it on will have a lot more stability than the original beach cat, and I've come to see that as a problem. Cats are pretty rigid-- it's the whole flagpole set in concrete thing that can lead to broken masts. Anyway, a tri is more forgiving when it comes to rig forces... shock loads are going to be lower.
Also, I have to admit there are good reasons why most micromultis that fold to be easily trailerable turn out to be tris. The tunnel hull syndrome makes it hard to have any sort of pleasant accommodations in a 20 foot cat unless it has fixed beam and a central cabin. Then of course it's limited to 8.5 feet of beam.
Besides, I'm sort of liking the idea of having a really fast boat, for a change.
The Everglades Challenge race is an excellent disaplay of these options. My small trimaran for that race was a lesson in bad timing; it was probably 85/15 canoe -- you do not want to paddle it much, with a load I could hardly keep it going 2 knots for the hours I had to paddle -- so I tried to sail it when I should have been paddling it in 2011, and that cost me. Canoes meant to sail as a second choice made much better progress (Kruegers, etc.). Yet in other weather, the canoes and kayaks with tiny sails this year were 10/90 canoes (let's say), but the high winds behind them made them effective sailors, otherwise, yes, their sails are small useful enhancements, worth carrying as long as you are ready to paddle most of the day.
Effective designs as tested in the EC sail well but tolerate a lot of paddling (and peddling) -- Hobie Adventures, etc., perhaps some CLC tri-kayak conversions as shown above -- what do we call them? 70/30's? (Morphing craft such as Ostlind's XCR as used in these year's EC are harder to pin down.)
Also, track down the thread(s) where Howard Rice talks about his sailing canoe Sylph -- he has thousand+ miles of camp-cruising in it. I forget what he called his -- I suspect somewhere between 60/40 and 80/20, but his lectures (I say that in a positive way) are enlightening in this regard. -- Wade
Last edited by wtarzia; 04-19-2012 at 09:31 AM.
How 'bout you take the main hull you've got, the 5.2, and put the whole thing together like a mini Trinado? I think I'd do that with the H18, but the hull attachment points are miserable for doing anything else with the hulls. I like the light long and powerful boats--hence the questions about the above tris like Mosquito, the Adventure tri, etc. However, for my solo + idea, I'm thinking smaller and lighter than those boats. Maybe somewhere between the Frank Smoot 16' boats and the Tamanu for the hull. Noting that both the the Seaclipper 20 and W17 are using silly simple shapes successfully, I wonder if something like that would work for me. I have two rigs to shoose from on either end of the spectrum. A Raptor 16 sail or the Hobie 18 rig. I was thinking also of keeping it light like Dave mentions. Solo boats are a bear if one can't drag them out of the surf line to get ashore. Both the W17 and the Seaclipper 20 are too big for that. The new Woods Strike 15 has only 250# of displacement available for skipper and stores, so I'm somewhere in between.
It's fun to noodle about such things though. The seating of both the W17 and Seaclipper 20 are appealing with their open cockpit and side seating shared by other examples shown above like the Discovery 20. It seems some sort of folding setup or quick assembly is a must. I think I favor long and lean rather than the skiff like form of the Weta. Since I do have some stuff already made, it might make sense to use it. However, time is seriously limited now with my growing family--so it might be more thinking for a while rather than building. I do know building to a plan is lots faster than making things up as I go along....
Dan, you've hit on a big problem with small cruising tris-- lack of displacement. I guess that's why most of the fast little tris don't have cabins.
The 20' one I've drawn displaces 1400 pounds max. With 3 hulls and a cabin, that doesn't leave much capacity for two people and gear.
Unfortunately, I don't have the Nacra hulls-- just the rig.
Oh well. I've got an idea for a 20 foot cat that might avoid the tunnel hull syndrome. But right now I'm going fishing in Slider. My wife just called and told me that they were catching Spanish mackerel hand over fist off the Shalimar bridge.
That's the spirit Ray. There's still a small idea of going with something like an overgrown A cat...but I'm going to check out the tri hopefully in June. I really like some of all three forms of multis--finding what works best for the potential 375-400# max load for the solo adventure is what I'm searching for. I think a single outrigger with safety ama, a small tri, or a light cat could get it done. However, since this is the small trimaran thread, let's hear more about the E15 or similar tris!
Hi Dave, That is a very light and small craft, I think it will be difficult to accommodate two adults and not effect the performance/safety too much. My first boat only had free-board of 12inches and on one occasion it soon filled up from the waves and I was forced to return to shore! I should add that it was just 8 feet long and only really made for my 10 year old son.
My boat, I also needed to be able to trolley it down to a beech/shore where the rest of my family would be windsurfing and store it in my garage over the winter hence its length of 176 inches (4.5m). The total boat ready to sail weighs in at 230 lbs (103 kg). It could be made lighter but I could only find 5mm ply locally and I am sure 4mm would be OK and much lighter. I would also reduce my Amas by 2-3 feet and the Laser mast is heavy. But having said that it all comes apart and the bits can easily be moved down to the shore and assembled.
Construction was simple 'stitch and glue' with 4 bulkheads, but to keep costs down (total build cost 450 euro) I used Polyester resin and very little wood other than the ply. I used floor insulation foam as additional bulkheads under the deck and cockpit floor. Akas are hollow box beams, rudder is straight of a Laser, lee-board is a centreboard from an Enterprise dingy. Yes the ama attachment is Dierking-esque, simple, effective and maybe I could cut the line and remove an ama if I was to capsize??
Is this small enough ? 8 foot by 6 foot, 4 meter windsurf sail, based on half a PDR (puddle duck racer), just 3 sheets of ply and wood glue !
As you suggest, Coucal, there are issues with low volume and freeboard. There is another issue with kayak conversions if one wants to take the boat into some of the higher available boat speeds... that being the fact that the hull is designed, specifically, for low speed work, such as one achieves through paddling. The prismatic coefficient of a typical paddled hull is very low, making it less than optimal for a sailed craft that can achieve higher routine speeds. Yes, kayaks are narrow, like a good multihull, but its the configuration of that narrowness that is in the way of an efficient boat.
Going beyond that, the kayak also confines the crew to the cockpit, which limits how much moveable ballast can be brought to bear in the sailing aspect of the design. It is possible to rig the kayak with a cockpit cover that has no tunnel, sealing off the interior and allowing the driver to get out on a hiking seat, or even a trampoline surface. This would give much greater righting moment to the overall design and allow for better speed through a broader wind range.... but then the driver is fully exposed to the elements and needs to dress accordingly. Warm water and weather= no problemo for this bit, but that is not always available to the owner of the boat.
Yes, I think such a craft is worth it, if that is the type of boating you wish to do. If you see yourself being able to make good miles down the coast with gear and stores in your vessel for a lengthy cruise. If you might want to shed the amas and akas, so that you can paddle quietly and easily in the back waters of an estuary. If you'd like to follow very narrow, winding waterways strictly via paddle power... and then reverse the whole design and go back to sailing once again, then yes, I'd say it is more than worth the effort to have a boat of this type.
The XCR did just that this year and Ben and Emily have some good video of their trip posted over on the watertribe blog. Neat stuff! I know they hit 10 knots downwind which is pretty good for a sailing canoe fully laden with an expedition load. They also has some shots of it as a single outrigger and some of it as a canoe. Inflatable amas made all that possible...that, and a canoe hull beam that allowed them to paddle it without amas.
It was blowing about 30 when they came by where I was sitting on Sunday morning. They looked to be going about 10 then. They would have been going even faster if they had some sail up!
(Ok, they did have a tiny bit of reefed sail showing... )
But you are absolutely right about the sail area in relation to the mode of the canoe I was sailing in EC2011. I vowed for my first solo attempt to aim for a steady safe pace so I could at least finish, with a rig I knew to be handleable up to 20 knots in a pinch, unreefed. I was trying the trimaran mode for the first time, and yes, I learned it was a very stable mode compared to my snap-roll single outrigger with a lower volume ama (~200 pounds vs. 400 pounds for one of those inflatables). That was one mistake, in a way -- I could have carried a large light-air rig quite safely with safety-margin-time for reefing it.
My usual rig at home is 54 on main, 37 on mizzen, and at home that is reliable-all-around from wind speeds 5-20 (iffy in 20 as a single outrigger) but often bad in light air. In light air I have used a big(er) standing lug alone (114 feet), which is better (no back-winding aerodynamic losses as a single sail), but over 15, hard to handle because of pronounced bow-down attitude.
For EC 2011 I used the 54 on the main and a smaller 20 on the mizzen. That is a good rough-weather rig (I did not reef when Chief asked me to not out of bravdao or disrepect but because I am experienced in that rig in brisk weather). But -- surprise! -- it was a bad gamble in the winds we had after 10 AM or on the first day. On sunday, had I not lost my rudder, and had I waited long enough for the wind to turn west as it started doing Sudnay afternoon after the squall, I could have done well enough with it (I also thought, wrongly I learned recently, that I would be disqualified for arriving at CP1 late Sunday night. I did not know the weather-hold rules nor that checkpoint managers have some discretion).
I just bought a 75 foot higher aspect sail (square topped, battened, deep reefs) for the main, and will test it with my 20 foot mizzen soon; same sail area as typical rig, but distributed more efficiently and focused on a more efficient mainsail. I am still left with the thought that I will be haunted by light air though. I need a bowsprit for this new rig because I have to add stay and shrouds, so I started looking at used spinnakers as I think about ways to raise a light air sail on the new 17 foot tall mast. Advice on this is invited. -- Wade
I was in the blue-green O'day Daysailer in 2011. We were probably 1/4 mile apart when I passed you on Saturday evening.
We actually met at the campground that year. I think you were one or two sites over from us. I was staying with Lugnut.
I remember looking at your boat on the beach and thinking it needed more sail area. If it were mine I'd want twice what you were carrying that year. If you don't need to reef until it's blowing 20, you need more sail. I don't know how much, but with those big amas you have a lot of power to carry sail. If it were mine, I'd rig up the 114'er as a balanced lug and make reefing as easy as possible. If you have sail with one reef in 10 knots, so what? As long as reefing is easy and fast, then it doesn't matter if you have to start reefing earlier.
John, I think that Ben and Emily showed some prudent restraint with their effort this year. They have inflatable amas sized nicely for their single, 56 sq. ft. rig and they produced some serious, 7+ knot sessions with that rig up. If you saw them clipping along at ten, then it must have been howling. The boat is structurally setup for a twin, 56 ft. rig if they decide to go with bigger amas. Once Ben gets some miles behind him with this rig, he'll be ready to take advantage of the full potential. I think their goal this year was to press the sailling just a bit, but nothing that would endanger their completion of the full EC.
Chris, I am attaching the forestay about three feet down from the masthead, and that will have to run down to a bowsprit approximately 5 or 6 feet long as measured from the base of the mast (the bowspit would be protruding about 3 feet past the stemhead) -- I haven't figured it all yet and it could change after testing.
One shroud will go aft about two feet and a fraction more and out along the fore-aka, and the other will attach to the short-aka with similar angles. The short aka and its aft mate will carry one of my inflatable amas. The safety-ama set up will have to fold over for storage and transport, and I plan to make the attachment lash-on. The safety ama will ride about 14 inches over flat water, so in most coastal sailing the boat will be "trimaran-ish" as the safety ama will probably get wet a lot. Its height can be easily adjusted up, though, if needed.
The stays are very thin Vectran, and will attach to horn cleats. The forestay is set (fractional) at the height for a 20 foot jib I have. In the past I found the bowsprit and jib harpooned the backs of steep waves, so the jib is not for rough weather. At 20 feet I was not sure if it helped the old stand-lug much. I hardly used it, but it will be an option. It was rigged as a self-tending, but I might bring it back to overlap the new square-headed main a little. Again, tentative. I will sail the canoe first with just the 75 main and 20 foot mizzen.
I had already planned another hound near the masthead because when I bought Chief's hardly used main sail, he tossed in a tall skinny jib on a roller furler for free. The jib is very skinny, though, as it runs up to the masthead, such that I wonder how well it will set, and how finicky it will be. Its area seems to not be much more than my 20 foot jib, but I have not calculated it. Maybe 25-30 feet at the most? Not quite a light-air boost. The masthead hounds will let me try it, and also I could fly a light-air spinnaker from it. Your idea for clippable back-stays would then come into play.
All this sounds fun in hypothesis, but the little narrow cockpit could become a mess with all those lines. Also, I have to keep an eye on the pitching moment on my little hull, since use of the 114 foot balanced lug pushed the bow down quite noticeably (the mast is 15 feet to the 12 footer on the old standing lug, and more sail area is up high). I used it on the lake in 20 knot winds -- supercharger! -- and on the coast in light winds so far. I wished heartily for the mizzen both trimes (the long boom of the balanced lug forced me to leave mizzen mast home). I could move the mizzen mast aft a foot and a half if I didn't have so manyother things to do, then 114 + 20 would make those slow days better, and the mizzen would bring back some control to reef at sea in a growing wind.
I don't want to agonize too much more with Short Dragon though, or spend a lot more money on him, as I have the plywood for the 20 footer right now, and that project must begin. I was thinking the new 75 main could possibly be a mizzen sail on the Tamanu, but I don't know. Maybe I will want a big square-top main on that boat and re-use the 20 foot mizzen for control and reefing. -- Wade
Hows this for small.
50" square. ~6' tall light air rig. Weighs about 4 lbs. all put together.
Its a T50 Trimaran from Tippecanoe boats, who make wood sailing models. A great way to practice!
Member of the Loyal, Mostly-Noble, Elite and Most Ancient order of the Laughing Polar Bear Cap Society.
I ask out of Ignorance, not Criticism.
The winning formula is to conceptualize an entire system, top to bottom, that utilizes known components, rather than try to make a functioning patchwork quilt out of sacred cow elements. Don't be afraid to get rid of some items that might have looked to be appropriate at one point if you discover that they cause more grief than pleasure in the process. Successful design rotates around an understanding of all the components available (and needed) rather than piece-mealing a project as disparate light bulbs go on intermittently while work has begun.
Wade... If you want to discuss the boat you are planning, please feel free to write me directly and I'll be glad to help. I'm not soliciting a paying gig here. I just want to help out in any way that I can so that you can create the boat you are really looking for.
Last edited by Chris Ostlind; 04-20-2012 at 02:34 PM.
[QUOTE=Chris Ostlind;3385578]. I watched that here on these pages when one of the members acquired a certain type of mast and sail setup and then proceeded to agonize over the layout of a boat on which to mount the rig. That process was compounded by the individual's inability to let go of certain aspects of a design he had in mind. The result was that the boat never really materialized in any functional way and it now looks to be road kill.
I resemble those remarks! My misguided attempt ran down the road of multiple designer's input and taking the design spiral way beyond what it was meant to do. However, the Holopuni proves I wasn't far off my original intent. I overbuilt the mast and it was (and is) too heavy. However, by backtracking to Gary's design intent, it's far from road kill.
It's been sold on and continues to come ever closer to Gary's design while fulfilling it's owner's desires. Sometimes early efforts aren't what 'ya want and the only failure is not moving forward. Watching Frank's early designs morph into something quite usable is a good example of that. Even experienced designers miss the boat once in a while though--Bolger was famously wrong on a design and the client came back for another thinking he couldn't be so off twice. Learning from mistakes is a good thing. Never trying something is worse. When I started, there were no Hawaiian canoe designs out there for strip building--until Gary put out his set of Ulua plans. That's still the case today, although I wish there were a 20ish foot version of Holopuni out there.
I find that if you are not in the mainstream, finding something right up your alley might not be available. Fortunately, most of this stuff isn't rocket surgery. It might not compete at the upper echelon of F18 or A cat. But if you get the CE & CLR right, you will probably have something functional. There are lots of fun designs put together by guys like Wade which fulfill their needs pretty well...and when they fall short or their desires change they can move forward with version 2.0. I'm sure Wade's Tamanu will be about perfect for his needs. I've been impressed with it's simple hull shapes being used in my Frankencat. My version 2.0 is being assembled for this summer.
Like you suggest though, building to plan is MUCH easier(faster too). Not having to make novice errors is even better. If there's a plan for what you want to do that's even better. Lately, ther's been a resurgence in small tris, both in the comercial marketplace and the designs for homebuilds. Cats and outriggers too....
My apologies to you, Dan, if it sounded like I was thumping on you in particular. It's not you, but actually a created, amalgam character that serves as a device for the conversation.
Still, this sort of thing does happen all the time in the small craft world. We latch onto some idea that we have for a boat of our dreams. We further stimulate the internal conversation by snatching-up a major component of the mental picture when we purchase a "great deal" on a used rig, or a pile of hardware, or some particular grouping of raw materials... and then go about the business of assigning that stuff to a project, even if the whole thing has not been sorted as a functioning concept. From my experience, the process described above is a reverse image of what probably should be utilized. Better to get one's ideas together for the craft that will make your dreams take shape, sit on the concept for a period of time while all the what-if's are worked through and then once the idea is solidly understood, go about the pounding around on the used gear lists, or your boating friend's gear pile for the necessary bits and pieces that can fit your dream.
Doing it the other way, only forces one to try to "fit a round peg..." kind of solution onto the still quivvering dream. For most of the folks on this list, there is not a deep pockets resource for swapping concepts mid stream. We more, or less, have to have some kind of act together in order for the whole thing to work economically, or truly, it would be a whole lot better to just go out and buy the manufactured boat that best fits the scenario one has in mind.