Subject: Re: [harryproa] Re: sailing Elementarry
From: "Rob Denney" <>
Date: 1/18/2006, 8:44 AM

Not much difference in speed, although I have no real numbers to compare as I have not used an Easyrig on Elementarry.  Cost is probably similar, the easyrig maybe a little cheaper. Ditto ease of construction.  I would be quite happy cruising with either.  Suspect neither is as fast as a wingmasted una rig, which is the next one to try..   
I found it was easiest to drop the jib and sail with the main only when I needed to reef. This would not work on the schooner where the aft sail would be reefed first.  It is pretty easy to sail the schooner on the front sail, very difficult on the rear one.
Polycore butt joins with bog or nothing.  It will require a lot of resin to fill the gap if infusing so some form of filling is probably required. 
Compounding Polycore may be possible with an iron, or with slits.  Need to do some tests to see. 

I must admit the schooner rig appeals to me as well, though when I pushed Rob
he seemed to favour the easyrig (Harry) and after all it's his baby and he
probably has more time sailing both rigs than all of us. What happens to the
balance of the easy rig with two reefs, or if you are running with the main
down in heavy air?
Would really appreciate a detailed comparison of the two with a few numbers
thrown in (speed, cost, ease of construction).
Another question about the poly-core, how do you do butt joins? how do you
form compound shapes? Sorry if this makes me sound like a Wally who knows
nothing but it's big project for me.

------ Original Message ------
Received: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 09:26:03 AM MST
From: "Robert" <>
Subject: [harryproa] Re: sailing Elementarry

For cruising I still prefer the schooner rig. Yes extra sheets and
sheet loads but you can bring sails closer to deck as you don't need
clearance for the forward part of the boom and you can couple the
sheets and use a small winch. Overall significantly lower c of e of
rig and therefore less capsizing moment for given sail area. Also for
shallow water sailing there is some directional control with just the
sails. Whether to go for a wingmast or a round mast with pocket luff,
I am ambivalent. Wing mast probably more efficient but I like
simplicity and reliability of pocket luff, Wharrams are pretty happy
with them (OK I know that is not necessarily an argument about how
well they sail but it is an argument over there reliability) I am
even tempted to go for a Wharram type gaff rig only using a nicely
curved carbon tube for the top spar. I like the idea of the unstayed
wishbone boom

Down wind for cruising it has to be a kite. Lifting bows instead od
depressing them. On a long downhill section put all other sails away
and relax unless you want to get that little bit more out of the kite
by figure of eight flying. No worries about leaping off the top of
the wave and plowing into the back of the next one, stalling and
pitchpoling as you haven't let go of the screecher in time and the
apparant wind has doubled. With a kite your bows stay up and if you
do stall into the back of the next wave the kite will pull you up
insead of over --- In, Mike Crawford
<jmichael@g...> wrote:
>   For going fast, I'm more a fan of Rob's schooner rig than the
>   This is partially because there are no concerns about forestay
> tensions, and fewer concerns about rig stiffness, and mostly
because it
> provides for more sail area, with better foil shapes, and a lower
> of effort.  When tacking downwind in light wind, two battened foil
> shapes are going to generate more lift than a main and jib, and
> running the schooner could present quite a wing-on-wing profile.
>   The schooner rig will require more winch work than an easyrig,
> only when lazy sailing.  if you want to be competitive, you'd need
> sorts of additional strings on an easyrig anyway.  I'd rather go
with a
> pair of extra-tall mainsails for light wind, and reef them in
> wind, than to try to stiffen an easyrig with running stays and
> to fasten additional headsails.
> ---
>   Speaking of rig stiffness, I do feel the need to weigh in on the
> comments about Rare Bird's rig.  Yes, it's pretty flexible. 
However, as
> the owner of a lightweight 27' cat, which can only be righted by
> boat if capsized, I can appreciate a rig that will allow some of
> gust energy to pass by the boat.  Going over on a beach cat or
> Elementarry is wet and inconvenient.  Going over on a 9+ meter boat
> tremendously uncool.
>   If you've got everything right on the edge, with the windward
> just skimming the water, it takes *very* little extra gust energy
> suddenly whip the boat over.  The only solution is to be lightning
> with the mainsheet, but that's a tall order if you're going to be
> it for more than ten minutes at a time.  Flying a hull is great
fun, but
> any look at the Stiletto nationals will turn up some boats that
> hold that fine balance in a gust.  Even the skippers of the
Reynolds 33
> lose it now and then.
>   When cruising, going past this edge is entirely unacceptable. 
> much better to have a flexible rig, with the addition of perhaps an
> outleader kite, than to risk gust-induced capsize (fool-induced
> of course, is rig-independent).
>   When racing, though, there's still something to be said about a
> that can handle the gusts.  Let's say you can fly a hull with 40 sq
m of
> canvas with a stayed rig, and 50 to 60 sq m of canvas with a more
> flexible rig.  The flexible rig provides two advantages.  First, in
> gust, the flexible rig will either allow you to keep sailing
> adjustments, or give you lots of time to adjust, while the stayed
> will require quick reflexes in order to avoid a capsize.  Second,
> extra 10 to 20  sq m of canvas will come into play nicely in the
> do so automatically, while the stayed rig will need to either
unreef or 
> hoist an extra sail to keep up.
>   Supporters of a stayed rig will point out that the extra canvas
> create extra drag, so in theory the stiffer rig will beat the
> rig in some conditions.  This is true.  But a capsized boat
> all rig advantages.  Besides, we don't all sail in exactly 15 knots
> trade winds, and changing wind conditions will likely favor the
> sail area and self-adjusting nature of the flexible rig.
> ---
>   The one change I would make would be to go with an unstayed
> rig like they have on the Wyliecats.
>   One adjustment line automatically handles sail shape, leech
> and mast bend, with very little stress on the boom.  Sail shaping
> very quickly done, the boom creates its own lazy jack pocket when
> the sails down, and a reduction in heeling moment can be achieved
> by reefing, flattening, or both, allowing for some quick sail
> adjustments for a minimal amount of time and effort.
>   However, I've never sailed a Wyliecat, so I can't speak from
> experience.  I just love the idea of it.
>        - Mike
> dominiquebovey wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Boats as light and canvassed as HP's mostly sail "close-hauled"
due to
> > their high speed, so they need a rather flat sail profile. But to
> > start you need a hollow profile, so the sail should be tunable
> >
> > I would see a 8.5m proa (maximum of M2 class) for 3 crew (minimum
> > number for racing on Lake Geneva), with easyrig, around 30-40m2
> > I am persuaded the easyrig is OK for racing, provided it is stiff.
> >
> > One of the crew would be adjusting the sail permanently (making it
> > hollower in the lulls, flattening it when speed increases).
> > crew would be running up/down the tramp to keep the LW hull just
> > the water, and the 3rd one steering.
> > And all crew could be going on trapezes when needed. So you need
> > running sidestays which can be attached to several selectable
> > on the WW hull or on the beams.
> > To go on trapeze, you unhook them off the boat, and hook them on
> > trapeze pants/harness whatever-the-word-is.
> > Naturally the rig must be self supported without the runners, for
> > cruising.
> >
> > I know it is quite a new boat, something between Harrigami and EL,
> > with more displacement. The Elementarry lw "sinks" about 1cm for
> > for the 8.5m the figure should be 20-25kg, so a less fine lw hull.
> > The Elementarry is unfortunately a little too light for 3 racing
> > I am afraid, as we discussed last year.
> >
> > Regards
> > Dom
> >
> >
> > --- In, "Rudolf vd Brug"
<rpvdb@f...> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Possibly the difference in sheeting in between you and the
> > lies in the fact that they where flying a spinnaker.
> > > That sail is so much fuller in shape it would redirect the wind
> > passing it much more than a flatter sail (or no sail at all)
> > >
> > > Some time ago I read an interesting article on a una rigged mono
> > with a wing mast. It was designed not to fly downwind extra's.
> > > The owner did have a gennaker but it only gave him one knot of
> > boat speed. It was concluded the tighter sheeting angle of the
> > might be responsible for this. The gennaker would generate so much
> > disturbance of the air passing at the leeward side it doesn't
> > to the main any more. Therefore the main doesn't generate lift as
> > does whith no head sail in front and is only  producing drag which
> > helps downwind but not as much as lift would.
> > >   ----- Original Message -----
> > >   From: Rob Denney
> > >   To:
> > >   Sent: Monday, January 16, 2006 2:19 PM
> > >   Subject: Re: [harryproa] Re: sailing Elementarry
> > >
> > >
> > >   G'day,
> > >
> > >   Not sure the kite would have helped much as the apparent was
> > forward of the beam.  Still intend to try it because they are such
> > great fun.  Interestingly, the Tornado was strapped in hard,
> > on the centreline, whereas i was quite eased on the same point of
> > and at the same speed.   Lots to learn...
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
> >
> >     * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> >
> >       
> >     * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >
> >       <
> >       
> >     * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> >       Service <>.
> >
> >

Yahoo! Groups Links