The small trimaran thread

[wtarzia]

Re: The small trimaran thread

Wade, I think would have paddled less in 2011 if you had a bit more sail area. I was famously slow getting off the beach that year and then tried to beat for a couple of hours without my centerboard which all conspired to put me way behind. I remember passing you somewhere north of Sarasota on Saturday afternoon and it appeared to me you mostly lacked horsepower. I think your boat could handle a lot more power than you've got on it.

--- Ha, I think it is hilarious meeting mysterious people on the sea and a year later finding out who they were/are on Internet :-) I was passed by Chief in his Krueger around 5 PM. Were you the guy rowing by me? (That might have been in the evening). A Bluejay passed me at that time too (Channing).

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

[John Bell]

Re: The small trimaran thread

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.

[wtarzia]

Re: The small trimaran thread

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.

--- OK, we did meet briefly at the campsite. I suppose my 16 foot canoe as a trimaran might take double the sail area of EC 2011 (about 150 feet), but I would usually be sailing with reefs. That trimaran configuration was only for the EC because of storage and transport issues at home -- back to the single outrigger with 6 feet between center-of-bouyancies, ama-to-vaka. I am considering that kind of sail area for the 20 foot single outrigger I plan to build soon (it will have a 9 or 10 foot beam, so I will have to design the akas to fold somehow). --Wade

[Chris Ostlind]

Re: The small trimaran thread

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... )

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 Ostlind]

Re: The small trimaran thread

... 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

Are you planning on a fractional rig on the main, or are you staying the mast from the tip? If you want to fly a spinny/screacher type sail and keep the everyday rig setup to a minimum, you can add temporary unclippable stays that run to your aft aka. Just keep them clipped-off down near the mast base until you need them to launch the kite. Then, run them aft to where the aka joins the amas and you'll have all the rig support you need for the spinnaker. Of course, all this gets practiced in a quiet bay in light air until you feel really comfortable. For offwind work, you'll feel like you have a super charger running. The longer the luff on the spinny, the more lift you will experience in the bow. A prodder can become a real weapon in close quarters.

[wtarzia]

Re: The small trimaran thread

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

[BBSebens]

Re: The small trimaran thread

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!

[Chris Ostlind]

Re: The small trimaran thread

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

Taking out a clean sheet of paper for the next exercise, Wade, will save you heaps of anxiety over the long haul. If you marry yourself to one component of the design, just because you have it on hand, you are limiting the overall design potential in a big way. 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.

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.

[Dan St Gean]

Re: The small trimaran thread

[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.
/QUOTE]

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....

Dan
Dan

[Chris Ostlind]

Re: The small trimaran thread

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.

[wtarzia]

Re: The small trimaran thread

Thanks Chris, I will keep that in mind. I definitely want the Tamanu "done right." Short Dragon was/is a wonderful platform for ramping up my learning. The old proa, Victor T, was totally crude but as my first boat, and a nontraditional one at that, it was also a good entry for what what it was. Short Dragon refined some building skills, and was also intended for constant experimentation, and that is exactly how it played out. I designed him in my head, and often as I sat in the garage or basement staring at the parts, the design changed. But his organic growth certainly led to evident compromises, and also too much brute strength (=weight) in the vaka and ama. Now I have Gary Dierking's plans to save me from myself, though I lament that I will be be building someone else's boat because primal creation is in my blood. I will probably save the ama design for myself, though. Gary does specify a larger rig suitable to my lighter air, and maybe I will go with that. I do know I am wedded to one thing -- a yawl rig. The ketch is a tad inefficient for diverse sailing regimes, but a yawl-mizzen is, I think, too good to forgoe. -- Wade

[Dan St Gean]

Re: The small trimaran thread

Thanks Chris, I will keep that in mind. I definitely want the Tamanu "done right." Short Dragon was/is a wonderful platform for ramping up my learning. The old proa, Victor T, was totally crude but as my first boat, and a nontraditional one at that, it was also a good entry for what what it was. Short Dragon refined some building skills, and was also intended for constant experimentation, and that is exactly how it played out. I designed him in my head, and often as I sat in the garage or basement staring at the parts, the design changed. But his organic growth certainly led to evident compromises, and also too much brute strength (=weight) in the vaka and ama. Now I have Gary Dierking's plans to save me from myself, though I lament that I will be be building someone else's boat because primal creation is in my blood. I will probably save the ama design for myself, though. Gary does specify a larger rig suitable to my lighter air, and maybe I will go with that. I do know I am wedded to one thing -- a yawl rig. The ketch is a tad inefficient for diverse sailing regimes, but a yawl-mizzen is, I think, too good to forgoe. -- Wade

Nothing wrong with a yawl. Keep it super small and let the big high aspect main do the driving for best VMG. If you don't mind stays, I like the rig Gary put together for his Va'Motu. I think that boat might be the perfect tri for my solo+ idea. Scale it down to say 18' and mimic the ama on the other side rather than the safety ama...just would have to figure out steering with that stern.

Dan

[wtarzia]

Re: The small trimaran thread

... I like the rig Gary put together for his Va'Motu. I think that boat might be the perfect tri for my solo+ idea. Scale it down to say 18' and mimic the ama on the other side rather than the safety ama...just would have to figure out steering with that stern.....

--- Really, quarter-steering can work well. I can count the number of times I made it through stays on my two hands :-), so I am perhaps too used to backing the main as a way of life. The only time it is truly bad is when tacking off a lee-something, and you risk losing ground. But a quarter steering rudder/oar does not mean that will happen. With my stern rudder, the old quarter rudder, and the older quarter steering oar, 90% of the time all I needed was a little backing to get around (and in fact when the wind is brisk there is generally more force available to bring me through stays, as I noticed in EC2011, when I was tacking through a squall with truly bad waves for a half hour *without* a rudder).

[DavePont]

Re: The small trimaran thread

just would have to figure out steering with that stern.Dan

As Wade says a quarter rudder could work. I did toy with the idea of rudders on amas for a tri, but making 2x everything and rigging steering all gets more complicated.

The Va'a Motu stern sure looks high, but in this video you can see waterline comes to the base of the transom underway:

So a stern rudder could work, pintles at mid and base of transom? You could build out slightly at the lower pintle to get it more vertical. Maybe it would detract from the beauty of the design though?

cheers, Dave

[wtarzia]

Re: The small trimaran thread

[QUOTE=DavePont;3387971]...So a stern rudder could work, pintles at mid and base of transom? You could build out slightly at the lower pintle to get it more vertical. Maybe it would detract from the beauty of the design though?...[QUOTE]

--- But Gary makes his quarter-rudder work on that hull just fine, so would not a proven design be OK here? The other advantage to the quarter rudder is having it close to hand and eye. --Wade