My sentiments also. The finer points are the shape of the sail. Do we
go the way of the windsurfer with a square top with batten
arrangements akin to a sprit rig like the Elementarry Rob is sailing
or a thinner tip like Elementarry 1. Do we go pocket luff or wing
mast. If wing mast, what proportion of sail area. According to Tom
Speer you go low or high but not in between. For racing it matters
for getting the last bit out of the rig but for cruising reliability
is probably the greatest concern as they all work. So what is the
most reliale combo? Much of this depends on quality of construction
and I suspect that this may be the dominant factor, but for me at the
moment I am vacillating between a Wharram type rig with an
elliptically curved gaff and a large area wingmast.

Robert



snip
>   Many people will argue for either design.  It all depends upon
what
> your priorities are.  For that matter, every rig mentioned so far
in the
> debate is a good choice, especially the easyrig (which offers a
very
> rare combination of performance and ease of use)..
>
>   My personal priorities are as follows: the best possible
performance,
> for a given height limitation, with the fewest strings to pull, and
the
> easiest way to dump wind quickly, while being generally forgiving. 
A
> schooner wishbone rig is not the absolute fastest rig, nor the
absolute
> easiest to shunt.  But it does come close to both, which is why I
like
> it.  Change the priorities, though, and the best rig will also
change.
>
>        - Mike
>
> 
>
> David Howie wrote:
>
> >
> > Question : in the Harry sized boat will all the components fit in
a
> > container
> > with the easy rig? with the Schooner?
> > Anybody like to clarify what Rob is wanting to try when he says
una
> > rig next.
> > Is it a single mast with a big main and nothing else?
> > By the way these boats are ruining my worklife, I spend all day
> > building it in
> > my head and no work gets done.
> > Personal preference is still the schooner with wishbone, but I'm
a
> > long way
> > from having to commit and like the debate, For me Rob could turn
me to the
> > easyrig if it were significantly cheaper, again one of the
attractions of
> > Harry is simple/cheap. I can't see the point in making it more
> > complex/expensive than is absolutely necessary.
> > As an aside, the local multi fleet is booming with a new 8.5 m
box rule. I
> > won't be doing it (I'm a cruiser now) but it would be interesting
to
> > see if a
> > proa could fit in their box then blow them all out of the water.
> >
> >
> >
> > ------ Original Message ------
> > Received: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 08:51:07 AM MST
> > From: "Mike Crawford" <jmichael@g...>
> > To: harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au
> > Subject: [harryproa] Re: sailing Elementarry
> >
> >
> >   You make good points with respect to stays and headsails. 
However,
> > one could also make the case that technological developments in
the
> > past fifteen years have made stays and headsails less important
than
> > they used to be.
> >
> >   Arguments for a wishbone boom, unstayed, wingmasted una rig (in
> > either a single or schooner setup):
> >
> >   - It's common for boats competing for the speed record to lack a
> > headsail, and instead use a variation of an unstayed, wingmasted,
> > shaped main.
> >
> >   - The speed record current is owned by a windsurfer using a
wishbone
> > una rig.  Granted, Maynard uses a planing board the size of a
large
> > spoon, but he's still using an una rig.
> >
> >   - A lower speeds, Wyliecat boats (catboats that use a single
> > wishbone-boomed una rig) have beaten larger boats upwind, when
many
> > people would argue that a headsail will really help.
> >
> >   - The una rig, especially if nicely tensioned, presents a very
> > efficient swept back profile that works well without a headsail.
> >
> >   - Stays generate a surprising amount of drag without
contributing
> > anything to forward motion.  While a portion of a flexble
unstayed rig
> > will also generate drag when the rig flexes leeward, it will pop
right
> > back into generating lift once a gust passes.
> >
> >   - The wishbone una rig is particularly adept at generating
lift, and
> > should require relatively light winch loads unless running.  With
the
> > sail being self-vanging, the only load on the mainsheet is that
which
> > is required to pull the sail just past the point where it luffs.
> >
> >   - With only a boom tensioner and a mainsheet, the wishbone una
> > requires less time and effort to achieve optimal sail shape. 
Unless
> > you have a full crew to pull strings all the time, the simpler
design
> > is likely to enhance speed over the course of a race.
> > 
> >   - The ability to fly the windward hull is actually much more
> > critical to reducing overall drag than extra sail area or stays. 
But
> > keeping that hull airborne, or just skimming the water, is a
delicate
> > balancing act.  In this scenario, you're much more likely to be
able
> > to hold that balance with a rig that can absorb gusts than with a
rig
> > that doesn't give at all.
> >
> >   - The lower center of effort on a schooner una rig, as compared
to a
> > taller easyrig, will likely allow it to generate more lift for the
> > same heeling moment.  Given that both boats use two sails, and a
> > stayed easyrig will have some additional drag of its own, the
lift to
> > drag ratio of the schooner rig will probably be equivalent or
better.
> >
> > ---
> >
> >   With that said, I do love the easy rig -- it's hard to dislike
a rig
> > that's so darn easy to sail.
> >
> >   It's just that any boat in my future plans needs to fit under
65'
> > bridges, and a 64' easy rig on a boat the size of the visionarry
isn't
> > going to give me the light wind performace I'd like.  Thus, I've
> > adopted a schooner rig with wishbone-boomed mains as my new
dream, and
> > have in the process become quite a fan of the una rig.
> >
> >
> >   - Mike
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au, "dominiquebovey"
> > <dominiquebovey@y...> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > > I agree with the safety associated with a flexible rig, for
cruising.
> > >  An easyrig without lateral support just would do it. Or a
schooner
> > > rig with unstayed masts.
> > > But I feel this is not adapted to racing. To go fast, you need
> > > "finesse" (I think it is said also in english, isn't it?). It
is the
> > > ratio of the perpendicular aero force to the planar force of a
> > > sail/wing/foil.
> > > Or you need lots of unstayed sail area to compensate for the
relative
> > > inefficiency of such a rig, which increases weight and drag too.
> > >
> > > And look at the C-class cats with their wing rigs, they easily
sail 3x
> > > the speed of windm 8whern they do ot break down.
> > >
> > > And there is the "foil" effect associated with the jib on the
leading
> > > edge of the mainsail. It accelerates the airflux on the lw side
of the
> > > mainsail and increases the propulsive force. And it balances
the rig
> > > with regards to the efforts to do winching...
> > >
> > > So for me the rig I would consider:
> > > - easyrig
> > > - boom and balstron are articulated separately
> > > - fore vang to be able to stiffen the forestay and aft vang to
flatten
> > > the main
> > > - lateral running stays, hookable on several points on the LW
hull
> > > (one must be able to sail the boat safely without them)
> > > - thick mainsail: a "double cloth" sail with soft foam battens,
going
> > > on two tracks on the mast
> > >
> > > Hope to be able to try this one time...
> > > Dom
> > >
> > > --- In harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au, "Robert"
<cateran1949@y...> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 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 harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au, Mike
Crawford
> > > > <jmichael@g...> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >   For going fast, I'm more a fan of Rob's schooner rig than
the
> > > > easyrig.
> > > > >
> > > > >   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
> > > > center
> > > > > of effort.  When tacking downwind in light wind, two
battened foil
> > > > > shapes are going to generate more lift than a main and jib,
and
> > > > when
> > > > > running the schooner could present quite a wing-on-wing
profile.
> > > > >
> > > > >   The schooner rig will require more winch work than an
easyrig,
> > > > but
> > > > > only when lazy sailing.  if you want to be competitive,
you'd need
> > > > all
> > > > > 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
> > > > normal
> > > > > wind, than to try to stiffen an easyrig with running stays
and
> > > > attempt
> > > > > 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
> > > > another
> > > > > boat if capsized, I can appreciate a rig that will allow
some of
> > > > the
> > > > > 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
> > > > is
> > > > > tremendously uncool.
> > > > >
> > > > >   If you've got everything right on the edge, with the
windward
> > > > hull
> > > > > just skimming the water, it takes *very* little extra gust
energy
> > > > to
> > > > > suddenly whip the boat over.  The only solution is to be
lightning
> > > > quick
> > > > > with the mainsheet, but that's a tall order if you're going
to be
> > > > doing
> > > > > 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
> > > > didn't
> > > > > 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.
> > > > It's
> > > > > much better to have a flexible rig, with the addition of
perhaps an
> > > > > outleader kite, than to risk gust-induced capsize (fool-
induced
> > > > capsize,
> > > > > of course, is rig-independent).
> > > > >
> > > > >   When racing, though, there's still something to be said
about a
> > > > boat
> > > > > 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
> > > > a
> > > > > gust, the flexible rig will either allow you to keep sailing
> > > > without
> > > > > adjustments, or give you lots of time to adjust, while the
stayed
> > > > rig
> > > > > will require quick reflexes in order to avoid a capsize. 
Second,
> > > > those
> > > > > extra 10 to 20  sq m of canvas will come into play nicely
in the
> > > > lulls,
> > > > > 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
> > > > will
> > > > > create extra drag, so in theory the stiffer rig will beat
the
> > > > flexible
> > > > > rig in some conditions.  This is true.  But a capsized boat
> > > > eliminates
> > > > > all rig advantages.  Besides, we don't all sail in exactly
15 knots
> > > > of
> > > > > trade winds, and changing wind conditions will likely favor
the
> > > > extra
> > > > > sail area and self-adjusting nature of the flexible rig.
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > >
> > > > >   The one change I would make would be to go with an
unstayed
> > > > wishbone
> > > > > rig like they have on the Wyliecats.
> > > > >
> > > > >      http://www.wyliecat.com/info/wishbone_rig.html
> > > > >
> > > > >   One adjustment line automatically handles sail shape,
leech
> > > > tension,
> > > > > and mast bend, with very little stress on the boom.  Sail
shaping
> > > > is
> > > > > very quickly done, the boom creates its own lazy jack
pocket when
> > > > taking
> > > > > the sails down, and a reduction in heeling moment can be
achieved
> > > > either
> > > > > 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
> > > > quickly.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 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
> > > > sail.
> > > > > > 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).
> > > > Another
> > > > > > crew would be running up/down the tramp to keep the LW
hull just
> > > > above
> > > > > > 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
> > > > points
> > > > > > on the WW hull or on the beams.
> > > > > > To go on trapeze, you unhook them off the boat, and hook
them on
> > > > your
> > > > > > trapeze pants/harness whatever-the-word-is.
> > > > > > Naturally the rig must be self supported without the
runners, for
> > > > easy
> > > > > > cruising.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I know it is quite a new boat, something between
Harrigami and EL,
> > > > > > with more displacement. The Elementarry lw "sinks" about
1cm for
> > > > 15kg,
> > > > > > 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
> > > > crew
> > > > > > I am afraid, as we discussed last year.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > Dom
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au, "Rudolf vd Brug"
> > > > <rpvdb@f...> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Possibly the difference in sheeting in between you and
the
> > > > Tornado
> > > > > > 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)
> > > > would.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 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
> > > > extra
> > > > > > boat speed. It was concluded the tighter sheeting angle
of the
> > > > main
> > > > > > might be responsible for this. The gennaker would
generate so much
> > > > > > disturbance of the air passing at the leeward side it
doesn't
> > > > attach
> > > > > > to the main any more. Therefore the main doesn't generate
lift as
> > > > it
> > > > > > 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: harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au
> > > > > > >   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
> > > > well
> > > > > > forward of the beam.  Still intend to try it because they
are such
> > > > > > great fun.  Interestingly, the Tornado was strapped in
hard,
> > > > traveller
> > > > > > on the centreline, whereas i was quite eased on the same
point of
> > > > sail
> > > > > > and at the same speed.   Lots to learn...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------
--------
> > > > ------
> > > > > > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
> > > > > >
> > > > > >     * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > > > > >       http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/harryproa/
> > > > > >      
> > > > > >     * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > >       harryproa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com.au
> > > > > >       <mailto:harryproa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com.au?
> > > > subject=Unsubscribe>
> > > > > >      
> > > > > >     * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of
> > > > > >       Service <http://au.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
------
> > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
> >
> >     * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> >       http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/harryproa/
> >       
> >     * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >       harryproa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com.au
> >       <mailto:harryproa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com.au?
subject=Unsubscribe>
> >       
> >     * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> >       Service <http://au.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> >
> >
>

• To visit your group on the web, go to:
  http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/harryproa/
   
• To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  harryproa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com.au
   
• Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.