Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst ... 234 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 105 of 202

Thread: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

  1. #71
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    northwestern Wisconsin
    Posts
    3,525

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Navigator has something like 136 sq ft of sail (I think--might be different for the yawl rig), while the Phoenix III reefed lug rig must be about 65 sq ft--about half. Are you saying it would also need 136 sq ft to keep up in the video?

    I would have thought it could get by with less sail area for the same speed if it indeed has lower resistance and wetted area. Sure, these things matter more at lower speeds, but they don't stop mattering entirely at higher speeds, do they? That's an honest question, by the way, not an attempt to say you're wrong.

    Tom
    You don't have to be prepared as long as you're willing to suffer the consequences.

    www.tompamperin.com

  2. #72
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Cummington
    Posts
    5,394

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Clint, you didn't mention directly any relationship between size of individual (you, or anyone else) and size of boat. But we do know, some of us anyway, that this is a factor.

  3. #73
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    4,978

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Tom,

    Phoenix is a bit lighter boat so would need less sail area for the same ratio.

    Indeed with less resistance she would need less for the same speed provided the crew can hold it.

    But that would make her the same speed, not faster as she should be in light air.

    So given same length, displacement etc, if her only advantage was the easier driven hull she'd need the same sail area approximately to be physically faster.

    The guy in the Phoenix can argue that he's using his 65 sqft lug more efficiently than the bigger Navy's, but the Nav went past it in absolute terms, because he didn't have enough sail area in absolute terms.

    If it were a racing rule, the Phoenix would win as it's the most efficient, but this is cruising free of rating, it game of absolutes not efficiency.

    I'm not looking at this as Nav v Phoenix they are both amount the best for each different type...

    In heavy air.

    Less wetted area is always better. Wave making is primarily a displacement issue. A light boat is less restricted to lwl speeds. Her waterline shape I haven't seen but low speed more concave aft waterlines will have more resistance than convex ones. A lower cp to help rowing and or more relatively forward lcb will now be dissadvatageous. The narrowish hull will afford less righting moment from rail weight and the innate stability from a displacement profile that has narrowish lwl beam for row efficiency will give less reserve form stability though motion comfort can be high on such a boat which also helps keep laminar flow over the sails.

    So a sail and oar boat has an easily driven hull but less innate ability to carry sail, though it doesn't need quite so much. The low midships beam can increase downflooding when pressed in a gust, but that's deck dependent.

    Ability to control sail shape is a factor especially flatten sails and or pull sail camber forward. Unstayed rigs won't hold sail shape so well and the masts weigh more. The sail boat's permanent rig allows permanent adjustable out hauls and Cunningham's for example so the sail can be flattened on the fly without stopping and reefing or to sail more close winded has less rig drag and have a higher vmg. The lighter mast lowers c of g, a wider total beam puts the helm weight potentially further out. So rig factors also influence to carry sail.

    The trick of reducing wetted area as speeds increase is a trick planing boats can achieve to have lower resistance still. Anyhow let's not go into 'sail boat' advantages. Basically it's their ability to carry sail in hull and rig form that needs consideration and which may be a factor in a straight race in relative terms, but a high motion comfort boat that can be moved without engine in light air, that is quickly rigged may easily out way any other consideration, and be a better boat to someone's needs, me included. If racing mattered we'd get a Laser, if speed in absolute terms mattered we'd get jet ski's.
    Last edited by keyhavenpotterer; 02-14-2014 at 04:58 PM.

  4. #74
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    northwestern Wisconsin
    Posts
    3,525

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Thanks--that's what I was trying to say: it's the ratio (SA/displacement) that matters, rather than sail area in absolute terms.

    The nice thing about all these boats--Navigator, Walkabout, Phoenix III, the Oughtred double-enders, is their ability to work to windward (or anywhere else) at 60 mph + on a lightweight trailer behind a little 4-cylinder car when you DO need speed in absolute terms. No jetski required!

    Tom
    You don't have to be prepared as long as you're willing to suffer the consequences.

    www.tompamperin.com

  5. #75
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    ESK, QLD, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    169

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Quote Originally Posted by keyhavenpotterer View Post
    Again both Navigator and Phoenix are both excellent boats.

    The first minute of this video is interesting.


    (Video removed to allow posting - RL)


    In this light to medium air battle, at this particular moment in time, in these conditions Sail Area to Displacement ratio is triumphant.

    The smaller reefed lug sail tested on the Phoenix at the time isn't being compensated enough by her lower wetted area, wave making resistance and likely slightly lower displacement.

    The bigger sails hoisted on the Navigator are more than compensating for its greater wetted area and wavemaking resistance.

    Under sail, at low Froude number speeds how much sail you can hoist is as if not more important, than how slippery the hull is. This is because wavemaking resistance only gains momentum as the boat does.

    Had the Phoenix hoisted equivalent sail area, she would have gone faster, as sail area can be more easily held in light air even on a less form stable hull. Alternatively devoid of wind, under fixed and very low and identical oar power, she would also be expected to go faster because she has a lower resistance hull at low speeds.

    It shows above the speed at which they are faster under oar and below the wind speed that requires reefing due to lower stability, to use the lower Sail and Oar resistance hull to advantage to avoid getting smoked, Sail and Oar boats must hoist then sit and and hold at least equivalent sail area.


    Ed
    Ed,

    I have to clear up a few things about the video in your post.

    Firstly, the boat being overtaken by the Navigator is not a Phoenix III - she is a Periwinkle - and in addition to that, she is reefed down to 71 Sq Ft of her normal 156 Sq Ft i.e. 46% of her working sail area. Secondly, the skipper of the Periwinkle was not racing, but Rick in the Navigator most certainly was (he always does!). Thirdly, both Phoenix III and Periwinkle are faster than Rick's Navigator most of the time, despite the fact that Rick is an excellent and competitive sailor. In the following video, you can see how Periwinkle goes against Navigator. You can trust me about this because the Navigator was the camera boat!



    I'll show another video in a separate post, as the moderator has said I can only show one per post.

    Ross Lillistone

  6. #76
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    ESK, QLD, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    169

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Here is the rest of my message...

    Also, you can have a look at the following video which shows an Iain Oughtred Fulmar, an Iain Oughtred Gannet and a John Welsford Navigator. The video was shot by Paul Hernes from his Phoenix III setting a Poohduck Skiff rig from his un-stayed mast. Paul was filming to the rear while sailing his boat single-handed - he stayed in front....

    http://vimeo.com/80235113

    I think there is a danger in relying on theory alone. Phil Bolger's Micro has been praised for her roomy interior and simple rig, but a lot of people without hands-on experience, label her as being a boat which would not be able to sail out of her own way to windward, due to the boxy hull sections and the long, shallow keel with no centreboard. Well I can tell you that on the same day as the Periwinkle video above was shot (or the day before - I'm not certain) I sailed against Rick's Navigator and a Penobscott 14 in the Micro. To my astonishment, and despite the fact that I was carrying two adult passengers, I was able to overtake both boats hard on the wind. Not only that, but for some reason that I still can't explain, I out-pointed them as well. The only way I can explain it is that Phil Bolger's superb design meant that the leeward chine was doing a lot of work in addition to that done by the keel. I have to say that the water was reasonably flat, and I think that a chop would have worked against the Micro. Remember, Micro has an un-stayed cat-yawl rig, which is notorious for not being a good windward rig. Check out the sail area/displacement ratio for Micro with the original (i.e. small) sail plan.

    I definitely agree with your comment about boat design being endlessly fascinating, but I have also learnt over the years that one must be ready for surprises!

    Ross Lillistone

  7. #77
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Saco, ME
    Posts
    2,209

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Quote Originally Posted by Thad View Post
    Clint, you didn't mention directly any relationship between size of individual (you, or anyone else) and size of boat. But we do know, some of us anyway, that this is a factor.
    Yes, I am 200# and 6'6" so I like have space! But I find I have that in even a 12-footer sitting on the floor.

    A lot of emphasis is being placed on the sailing end of the spectrum. My other current project is a project where I have taken my first design-build project of my career, reworking it with heaps of hindsight, and coming up with Drake 19.

    Here is a recent quote from an email with an inquirer:

    "Thanks for the response. I know every boat is a "compromise", but I'm coming around to realizing that what you've designed is perhaps a near perfect oar and sail boat. All boats serve a certain slot of intended function and I should leave this one at that. Any overlap in the Drake and Sooty will overlap will be good."

    With time people may realize that boats that are stable rowboat hull shapes -- Drake, Gartside's Bob and Coastal Rowboat, and a few others -- are actually the ideal sail-and-oar boat because you can actually get best of both worlds. A sailboat for downwind (no daggerboard or centerboard!) and a hull that is easily driven under oars. Its almost always faster and more enjoyable to row upwind, get exercise, and sail downwind.

    Here is a bit about Drake 19 on my FB page.
    https://www.facebook.com/ClintChaseB...type=1&theater
    Clinton B. Chase
    Portland, Maine

    http://tinyurl.com/myboats

  8. #78
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    11,885

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Quote Originally Posted by Clinton B Chase View Post
    Its almost always faster and more enjoyable to row upwind, get exercise, and sail downwind.
    I actually kind of agree with you, Clint. And I love a good rowboat, one that is light and unencumbered.

    But. . . what about reaching? Unless you're in a fjord, it's not only uphill or downhill. And rowing in a beam sea is the least pleasant aspect. Ah well. . .that's probably a spurious complaint. After all, even square-riggers and sharpies can manage a beam reach. Big Drake should do adequately enough.

    I think there's a lot to be said in favor of the Oar & Sail approach. The boat can be simpler and lighter, that's for sure. You'll use strategies more similar to sea kayaking than sailboat cruising.

    I always liked the style and purpose of your original Drake, Clint. I am hoping this light Whitehall I started building last weekend will tick a few of the same boxes.

  9. #79
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ballard
    Posts
    8,008

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    You're going to look right at home in front of that transom, McMullen.
    Quote Originally Posted by James McMullen View Post
    Yeadon is right, of course.

  10. #80
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Firth of Forth, Scotland
    Posts
    561

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Clinton B Chase View Post
    With time people may realize that boats that are stable rowboat hull shapes -- Drake, Gartside's Bob and Coastal Rowboat, and a few others -- are actually the ideal sail-and-oar boat because you can actually get best of both worlds. A sailboat for downwind (no daggerboard or centerboard!) and a hull that is easily driven under oars. Its almost always faster and more enjoyable to row upwind, get exercise, and sail downwind.
    Intriguing compromise on the row --- sail spectrum. With my Walkabout I actually only row to windward if I need to get somewhere under time pressure, or if I just fancy some exercise. Otherwise I tend plan my sail (when just pottering about) to avoid rowing, mainly because it's fun to get the best out of the boat to windward.

    I've no plans to abandon Walkabout, but I'm toying with the idea of SOF pulling boat - see this thread:
    http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthre...oat&highlight=

    Key criteria are easy to carry down to the water at the drop of a hat and ability to cope with choppy conditions if necessary. Top of my list at the moment is LFH17. Until now I hadn't thought about a downwind rig - any thoughts whether a carry-to-water SOF oar and sail boat is doable?
    Osbert
    -
    Scratch, a Welsford Walkabout, and Selkie, a Clint Chase Drake 17 rowboat

    http://forthsailoar.osbert.org

  11. #81
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    northwestern Wisconsin
    Posts
    3,525

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    I really like Drake--oar and sail seems to make a lot of sense, rather than sail and oar. I'll probably be closer to that with my Alaska anyway, though it's compromised further from pure rowing with a centerboard.

    Still, I suspect I will usually sail if there's wind, even when logic dictates otherwise. But I do have some long river/canal trips in mind, and that's when I'll REALLY be glad I have a pulling boat, mostly.

    Clint, you may not remember, but I talked to you on the phone about your GIS yawl rig a few years back when I was writing an article about the Texas 200. Drake and the Calendar Islands Yawl both look like great boats.

    Tom
    You don't have to be prepared as long as you're willing to suffer the consequences.

    www.tompamperin.com

  12. #82
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Fairfield, CA
    Posts
    1,257

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    This may be drifting a bit from Tom's original question about size, but since the topic of oar and downwind sail is open I will try to post my first forum picture of a downwind twin sail on a Walkabout. This rig is driven by the conditions in the Sacramento Delta (high summer winds in narrow, shallow channels), but was inspired by Clint Chase's downwind rig on Drake.


  13. #83
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Fairfield, CA
    Posts
    1,257

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Wow, look at that - follow Thorne's directions exactly and it works. Way back on the forum, Todd Bradshaw had mentioned a BSD Twins(tm) rig as hard to beat for downwind, this is a polytarp experiment of that type. For the Delta channels, I like it because it is fast to deploy, depower or strike completely. Here it is stowed at the bow.

  14. #84
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    11,885

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Quote Originally Posted by Osbert View Post
    . . .any thoughts whether a carry-to-water SOF oar and sail boat is doable?
    I've got maybe 20 hours, tops, left on this skin-on-frame Gentry Whitehall I'm plugging away at, so. . . .can I give you an answer in a couple of weeks?

  15. #85
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Firth of Forth, Scotland
    Posts
    561

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by James McMullen View Post
    I've got maybe 20 hours, tops, left on this skin-on-frame Gentry Whitehall I'm plugging away at, so. . . .can I give you an answer in a couple of weeks?
    I look forward to hearing how it works out. I'll have to look again at the dimensions; I had been thinking longer, narrower, lighter, hence the LFH17. Also the ply bottom seems to have advantages for building and in use, but perhaps not if you're trying to sail on reach!
    Osbert
    -
    Scratch, a Welsford Walkabout, and Selkie, a Clint Chase Drake 17 rowboat

    http://forthsailoar.osbert.org

  16. #86
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Fairfield, CA
    Posts
    1,257

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Quote Originally Posted by Osbert View Post
    Key criteria are easy to carry down to the water at the drop of a hat and ability to cope with choppy conditions if necessary. Top of my list at the moment is LFH17. Until now I hadn't thought about a downwind rig - any thoughts whether a carry-to-water SOF oar and sail boat is doable?
    I just acquired a SOF LFH17 (one of two built by Steve Chambers) to test a slide seat on. At 17' by 43" it is much tippier than Walkabout, I won't be trying a sail on this one. Skilled sailors might -it seems more like a sailing canoe. -Rick

    Last edited by rgthom; 02-15-2014 at 07:57 PM.

  17. #87
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Saco, ME
    Posts
    2,209

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Quote Originally Posted by James McMullen View Post
    I actually kind of agree with you, Clint. And I love a good rowboat, one that is light and unencumbered.

    But. . . what about reaching? Unless you're in a fjord, it's not only uphill or downhill. And rowing in a beam sea is the least pleasant aspect. Ah well. . .that's probably a spurious complaint. After all, even square-riggers and sharpies can manage a beam reach. Big Drake should do adequately enough.

    I think there's a lot to be said in favor of the Oar & Sail approach. The boat can be simpler and lighter, that's for sure. You'll use strategies more similar to sea kayaking than sailboat cruising.

    I always liked the style and purpose of your original Drake, Clint. I am hoping this light Whitehall I started building last weekend will tick a few of the same boxes.
    Hey James I learned that Drake is kick ass on a beam reach. We did a 7 mile day on one of the SRRs (the day after a I busted my mast step; thank goodness for Gorilla Glue and a few screws to hole it together for that glorious morning of reaching). I was right up in front with CY's and other sailboats. They were looking at me like, "Weren't you just rowing yesterday!!??"
    Clinton B. Chase
    Portland, Maine

    http://tinyurl.com/myboats

  18. #88
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    71,954

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Quote Originally Posted by Ross Lillistone View Post
    Ed,

    I have to clear up a few things about the video in your post.

    Firstly, the boat being overtaken by the Navigator is not a Phoenix III - she is a Periwinkle - and in addition to that, she is reefed down to 71 Sq Ft of her normal 156 Sq Ft i.e. 46% of her working sail area. Secondly, the skipper of the Periwinkle was not racing, but Rick in the Navigator most certainly was (he always does!). Thirdly, both Phoenix III and Periwinkle are faster than Rick's Navigator most of the time, despite the fact that Rick is an excellent and competitive sailor. In the following video, you can see how Periwinkle goes against Navigator. You can trust me about this because the Navigator was the camera boat!



    I'll show another video in a separate post, as the moderator has said I can only show one per post.

    Ross Lillistone
    Ross, is that on Moreton Bay ? I looks like it . That Navigator has a very nice set of sails.
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  19. #89

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    This has been a great thread to follow. I love all these cool videos, great boats, and spirited debate. I would think that Phoenix III would be faster, most of the time, than Navigator, but Navigator would definitely carry more stores and cruising gear. It all depends on what you need most. This has been fun, a great way to spend a couple of cold winter evenings! - John

  20. #90
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    ESK, QLD, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    169

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterSibley View Post
    Ross, is that on Moreton Bay ? I looks like it . That Navigator has a very nice set of sails.
    No, Peter, it isn't Moreton Bay. It's Atkinson's Lagoon, halfway between Esk and Gatton. But you have to wash your mouth out! That isn't a Navigator (not that Navigators aren't nice boats, by the way) - that is an example of my Periwinkle design, being sailed by her owner, John Shrapnel. The sails were made by Allwood Sails in Brisbane. The camera boat was a Navigator​.

    Ross Lillistone

  21. #91
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Firth of Forth, Scotland
    Posts
    561

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rgthom View Post
    I just acquired a SOF LFH17 (one of two built by Steve Chambers) to test a slide seat on. At 17' by 43" it is much tippier than Walkabout, I won't be trying a sail on this one. Skilled sailors might -it seems more like a sailing canoe. -Rick
    Hi Rick - that's what I suspected! Weight - rowing - sailing - compromises, conpromises!
    Osbert
    -
    Scratch, a Welsford Walkabout, and Selkie, a Clint Chase Drake 17 rowboat

    http://forthsailoar.osbert.org

  22. #92
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Firth of Forth, Scotland
    Posts
    561

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Clinton B Chase View Post
    Hey James I learned that Drake is kick ass on a beam reach. We did a 7 mile day on one of the SRRs (the day after a I busted my mast step; thank goodness for Gorilla Glue and a few screws to hole it together for that glorious morning of reaching). I was right up in front with CY's and other sailboats. They were looking at me like, "Weren't you just rowing yesterday!!??"
    Clinton, what's the weight of your Drake 17? Couldn't find it on your site.
    Osbert
    -
    Scratch, a Welsford Walkabout, and Selkie, a Clint Chase Drake 17 rowboat

    http://forthsailoar.osbert.org

  23. #93
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Cushing, Maine
    Posts
    3,383

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Biggest challenge to carrying a rowboat, assuming you get the weight south of 60lbs, is sorting out how to roof rack and carry it. The SOF LFH (or guideboat or....) will be light enough but beam is an issue. Hence a yoke of some kind should be added.

    The LFH is a pretty bad choice as a sailing boat; I know of one built that way which was not a success. Waterline beam is narrow. A reaching/ running sail could be fun, however, as long as the kit does not get in the way. Kites and umbrellas are pretty compact....
    Ben Fuller
    Ran Tan, Liten Kuhling, Tipsy, Tippy, Josef W., Merry Mouth, Imp, Macavity, Look Far, Flash and a quiver of other 'yaks.
    "Bound fast is boatless man."

  24. #94
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ballard
    Posts
    8,008

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Quote Originally Posted by rgthom View Post
    I just acquired a SOF LFH17 (one of two built by Steve Chambers) to test a slide seat on. At 17' by 43" it is much tippier than Walkabout, I won't be trying a sail on this one. Skilled sailors might -it seems more like a sailing canoe. -Rick

    Did Steve have that boat at the Port Townsend Festival two years ago? If so, then I had a chance to row. it. I really enjoyed it. I took her out into the bay, then down near the ferry terminal and back.
    Quote Originally Posted by James McMullen View Post
    Yeadon is right, of course.

  25. #95
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Saco, ME
    Posts
    2,209

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Quote Originally Posted by Osbert View Post
    Clinton, what's the weight of your Drake 17? Couldn't find it on your site.
    Hi, Drake 17 has been built as light as 90. It's not a cartopper nor meant to be ultralight. It is light enough for open water rowing. Too light in open water makes for a jittery boat. Been in those before.

    By the way I am glad someone brought up the LFH boat and skin on frame. But its not a Sail and Oar or "Oar and Sail" boat.

    We should get diversity in here so it doesn't become a marketing campaign for the few designers here participating. I like learning new things from new boats.

    How about the beautiful boat in Small Boats an issue or two back. It is lugger with a mizzen...Australian. Real nice boat. These "underdog" guys shouldn't be left out.
    Clinton B. Chase
    Portland, Maine

    http://tinyurl.com/myboats

  26. #96
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Fairfield, CA
    Posts
    1,257

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Quote Originally Posted by Yeadon View Post
    Did Steve have that boat at the Port Townsend Festival two years ago? If so, then I had a chance to row. it. I really enjoyed it. I took her out into the bay, then down near the ferry terminal and back.
    Yes, this is the first one he built which I think was the one at Pt Townsend. It is really light at 60 lbs, going to be a car-topper when I finish making a rack for the Honda. The fine ends might hobby-horse some with a sliding seat, but I would like to see what kind of speed could be maintained. Tom Kremer is adding a slide seat to his Herreshoff also.

  27. #97
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lindstrom, MN
    Posts
    2,153

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    This is a great thread for the ideal boat for moderately open to fairly protected waters. For shallower, more convoluted waters a different sort of boat is needed. Having said that, this thread is too good as it is and the shallow, narrow water boats should be in a thread of their own.

    It looks like the cut off point for this type of boat on the small end is about the same as the high end for car-topping unless you are looking at shallow water and narrow places. There are ways to get a lot of of boat on top of a car, but that would be difficult with a P III. The high end seems to be around 18', but something like Bolger's Light Schooner might stretch the envelope to 20', albeit with somewhat compromised elegance.

    In posts 57 - 62 there was some discussion of the limits for sail vs. oar with respect to wind and waves. Ben Fuller, based on a wealth of experience, pretty well summed it up. There is a point where you have to strike the rig and row. In my limited experience, rowboats like a guide boat or Chip-skiff's nicely executed Gypsy can be rowed into F-6-7 winds if there isn't enough fetch to build large waves, but I doubt that the Gypsy could sail to windward in an F-6. Rowing Gypsy into an F-6 with just the rig on board is crowded, so for a more rowing than sailing trip in a smaller boat, perhaps Dylan Winter's Duckpunt rig is a good compromise.

    Ed's summary in Post 32 is a good one. Perhaps he should add '7. Cruising grounds'. Case in point is Dylan Winter's shallow estuaries, where it's too shallow for a good open water boat. I won't pretend to match Ed's eloquence, so I'll cut it down to just the list and leave it to someone else to flesh out the details:
    Quote Originally Posted by keyhavenpotterer View Post
    Tom,

    With so many interelated factors currently my sail and oar start protocol is:-

    1. Summate your weight, the boats weight and your gear weight.
    2. Chose your sail area based on a sail area to displacement ratio.
    3. Hull topside beam and freeboard at the oarlocks, set by rowing ergonomics for the individual.
    4. LWL Beam and Length.
    5. Above LWL shape.
    6. Non aquatic factors.

    Ed

  28. #98
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Firth of Forth, Scotland
    Posts
    561

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Quote Originally Posted by Clinton B Chase View Post
    Hi, Drake 17 has been built as light as 90. It's not a cartopper nor meant to be ultralight. It is light enough for open water rowing. Too light in open water makes for a jittery boat. Been in those before.
    Thanks for the weight of Drake 17. Are you saying a SOF is always going to light for open water rowing? (Not challenging you - trying to understand so I have less chance to make poor choices!)

    By the way I am glad someone brought up the LFH boat and skin on frame. But its not a Sail and Oar or "Oar and Sail" boat.
    Good to understand it's limits, thanks.

    We should get diversity in here so it doesn't become a marketing campaign for the few designers here participating. I like learning new things from new boats.

    How about the beautiful boat in Small Boats an issue or two back. It is lugger with a mizzen...Australian. Real nice boat. These "underdog" guys shouldn't be left out.
    While looking for something else - in fact googling images to try and find a cheaper version of your cool folding rowlock - I found this:









    Brian Shulz of Cape Falcon Kayak's skin on frame Joel White pulling boat
    (18' long 54" beam 21" depth to sheer amidships)

    More cruising images here:
    http://www.capefalconkayak.com/campcruisingcortez.html

    and the build here:
    http://www.capefalconkayak.com/jwboat.html
    Osbert
    -
    Scratch, a Welsford Walkabout, and Selkie, a Clint Chase Drake 17 rowboat

    http://forthsailoar.osbert.org

  29. #99
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    BC Coast
    Posts
    3,777

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Rowing boats and rowing and sailing boats are not all weather boats. They are nearly all open boats and vulnerable to the wind and sea. If the sea is warm you may find a wetting a relief or at worst a slight bother. I watched small inshore fishing boats working of the east coast of India...essentially refined rafts sailing out of sight offshore. these were wet boats, but it did not matter as the water would drain on its own and it was warm. If you are in a cold water area as most of us recreational sailors are, then keeping the water out is paramount.
    James McM states clearly that unplanned dumping is not an option...he is completely right. part of the answer is simply to not put yourself in harms way...do not go out...period...if the wind or sea is too high.
    When I was working my way along the North Shore of Lake Superior and through Pukaskwa...we...our small group lost about 1 day in 3 or 4 to weather. we stayed on the beach.
    If a force 6 or 7 springs up...you do not want to try rowing 2 or 3 miles into it. when I was doing a lot of rowing, I had a bunch of default ports of refuge for whatever wind blew me adrift. I could and did row to windward a mile or so. But do not recommend it as a plan.
    For sailing...I'd guess some of the larger boats discussed on this thread could be reasonable good under a reduced sail plan working to windward in a strong wind.
    The answer is to be slightly over weather cautious...enjoy your trip and come home.

  30. #100
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Wow-Ming
    Posts
    17,484

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Quote Originally Posted by MN Dave View Post
    In my limited experience, rowboats like a guide boat or Chip-skiff's nicely executed Gypsy can be rowed into F-6-7 winds if there isn't enough fetch to build large waves, but I doubt that the Gypsy could sail to windward in an F-6. Rowing Gypsy into an F-6 with just the rig on board is crowded, so for a more rowing than sailing trip in a smaller boat, perhaps Dylan Winter's Duckpunt rig is a good compromise.
    Here's the subject of discussion:



    My preference is for light to medium airs, but mountain weather changes quickly. Consequently, I've sailed my Gypsy to windward in Force 6, gusting higher, and she goes like the devil (with a reef, of course). The unstayed mast of native lodgepole pine does dictate caution, so I can't see hiking out and trying to get up on a plane (there are reports of Gypsies planing). One reason I built a new lug rig was that the shorter mast could be stowed more handily, out of the way. I'll also hasten to say that I didn't set out in those wind conditions but once they arose, had to beat back to the ramp or endure a trial-by-oars. Not much fetch on that lake, so the waves were no worry, except for cold spray. The low freeboard reduces windage, but when the waves kick up, she can be rather wet going to windward.
    Last edited by Chip-skiff; 02-16-2014 at 06:47 PM.

  31. #101
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Northern Europe
    Posts
    9,215

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    Compromises, compromises, compromises. The low hull and windage of ChipSkiffs Gypsy, works where he sails with not much risk of wave heights. Boats like Navigator with much more freeboard would work well in more open water with higher chop while keeping most of the wet stuff out. If you have good self bailing cockpit, good dry sacks and a drysuit then there is no reason why you couldnt drive a boat through pretty much anything if you dont mind getting wet and enjoy fast sailing, even a laser could be a good boat depending on your priorities. I covered a lot of milage in Mistral weather in the South of France with all my kit in a single dry bag with a topper dinghy, but wouldnt choose to tour that way today. Local conditions would dictate final design criteria.....for me, a stable design of around 12ft with emphasis on sail ability over rowing would work well in these parts (Northern Europe). My Michalak family skiff with some additional side decks would be a safe boat, and light enough to drag up a beach.....i couldnt imagine filling all the avaliable stowage bouyancy tanks with a single handers kit,lots of stowage room, in my opinion, let down by its rowing performance, but works well as a compromise.

  32. #102
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Saco, ME
    Posts
    2,209

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    RE: questions in #98, by Osbert.

    I row in open water often. Its simply more fun. But like in powered fishing boats, if the boat is too light there is a lot of wasted energy trying to keep the boat steady. I found Drake more comfortable in the chop than "ultralight" boats. Perhaps that is because of my size and power -- I am 6'6" and can really pull on oars! But that is my experience.

    That SOF Shearwater 18 is a nice boat. I remember reading the WB article when it came out because I had just bought plans for the Shearwater 18. Nice boat! Really good for sail-and-oar general use.

    Osbert you'll be hard pressed to find folding outriggers that are not expensive! If you do please let me know. The ones I have are not MINE but Shaw and Tenney's. I do have a set designed in the computer but have not gotten them 3D printed yet and tested. I plan to do that at some point. But I'd like to put the time and energy into a set that are Carbon Fiber.

    Anyway, the talk about weather is a good one. When I broke my mast step it was in a squall after a beautiful morning of rowing upwind and sailing back down during one of the earlier Small Reach Regattas. Sometimes, when you put yourself out there, ^%$%(*& happens. I believe the LUG RIG is the best for sail-and-oar (oar-and-sail, especially) because -- in a hurry -- you can douse that sail area.

    I find there is a lot of fuss about making the mast short enough to fit into the boat. I don't find that to be that important. Often I row with the mast under a thwart and sticking out the stern. That seems to be best. For stowage and going over the road it is convenient if the rig can tie down to the thwarts. But I find to get the sail area and aspect ratio that I like (and the boom above eye level) that the mast needs to be longer and the trade off needs to be accepted that the length of the mast will not fit completely within the boat.
    Clinton B. Chase
    Portland, Maine

    http://tinyurl.com/myboats

  33. #103
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    SF Bay Area- Richmond
    Posts
    15,434

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    On the outrigger topic, don't forget the bent-ply design. Widely used out here, and in most cases it can be pulled out and reversed (pointing into the boat) for transport or coming alongside docks or boats.

    "The enemies of reason have a certain blind look."
    Doctor Jacquin to Lieutenant D'Hubert, in Ridley Scott's first major film _The Duellists_.

  34. #104
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Firth of Forth, Scotland
    Posts
    561

    Default

    Thank for the info Clinton. Yes, I saw where those outriggers came from, I was hoping there might be a galvanised version somewhere! I think I'll end up with the ply ones as Thorne suggests.
    Osbert
    -
    Scratch, a Welsford Walkabout, and Selkie, a Clint Chase Drake 17 rowboat

    http://forthsailoar.osbert.org

  35. #105
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Saco, ME
    Posts
    2,209

    Default Re: Size in Sail-and-Oar Boats

    I like the ply one because its something we can make easily, but it is very vulnerable. Coming into a dock nees to be done carefully. With the Brz folding outriggers I can swing them in with one flick. My design has a ball dent so its even quicker and easier. There will be some loss in energy with these ply laminated riggers. Carbon Fiber version that is somehow hinged would be the cats meow. The brz ones are prettier, but probably heavier too.

    But we digress from the thread.
    Clinton B. Chase
    Portland, Maine

    http://tinyurl.com/myboats

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •