Subject: Re: [harryproa] Re: Revised ideas on big trailerable
From: "Gardner Pomper" <gardner@networknow.org>
Date: 6/23/2008, 12:01 PM
To: harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au
Reply-to:
harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au

It is good to get different points of view. I had not considered trailering a 12' wide load. I am not sure I am brave enough to do that; trailering my 25' tri at 8'6" made me pretty nervous, but there are  a couple of advantages that you had not mentioned. One is that it should actually be easier to get set up and break it down, because you don't have to remove the cross beams. This may lead to making life simpler for the rudder mountings, outboard, etc. Speaking of which, does anybody know if it is practical to have the rudders mounted at the midpoint of the beams? They would be closer to the helmsman, could be mounted on the larger beam that doesn't get removed in your scheme, and could potentially be used with a wheel, since they stay in the same place regardless of whether the boat is collapsed or expanded.

On the other side, expanding the ww hull to 9-10' puts the boat more in the visionarry class than the harry class for accomodations, but with an expanded beam limitied to 20' I am worried that the sail performance would be compromised because you don't have the 27' beam of the visionarry to counter the rig. Robert has ideas on expanding the beam by basically going to a double telescoping design, but I am nervous enough about how well a single telescope will work.

I think that what you describe is closer to what Robert is working on than mine. I will be very interested to seeing those drawings when they get posted. I might play with the idea of making my flip down walkway fixed, which would allow 2 queen bunks and better cockpit layout. I think you still need a way to get forward and aft, so I will have to play with it.

As for the containerization, that is just a cost-saving idea. I can always go with a regular boat shipping transport, which (at 12' beam) may not be THAT much more expensive than putting it in a container, especially if it makes the boat more complicated (i.e. expensive) to build for an idea that I may never use.

Thanks for the feedback. It keeps me thinking!

BTW, where are you located? Maine?

- Gardner
York, PA


On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 8:56 AM, Mike Crawford <jmichael@gwi.net> wrote:

Gardner,

  The last time I checked, the bulk of the states on the east cost of the US had similar requirements for wide loads.  While the max wide load requirements differed, most allowed a 12' wide by 80' long load (includes the tow vehicle) without an escort vehicle. 

  Anything wider or longer would require an escort vehicle with a large sign to either lead, follow, or both.  All states require a wide load permit for anything over 8.5', but these are easy to get.

  Thus, my ideal maxi-trailerable would collapse down to a 12' beam, on the water, and then set onto a fixed trailer.  This would allow the boat to be launched and retrieved with little hassle, and wouldn't require the use of a team of boatyard hands, forklift, travelift, or other such assistance.  I doubt it could be done by a single person, but you could probably do it with two, and that's a lot better than trying to schedule a whole team.

  We have an expanding trailer for the current catamaran, but for us it's more trouble than it is, and we're currently using a boatyard in the winter.  Sometimes the trailer cooperates, sometimes it doesn't, and it's really tough to keep the expanding beams and their mechanisms working properly.  It's also nowhere near as strong as a monolithic trailer.

  With Rob's lifting-pole design for stepping the mast (a separate pole with a block that lets you hoist the mast by its center of gravity and then step it), you could get into the water in less than half a day.  That's not quite the 30 minutes that some companies advertise, but in the end, no boat over 30' goes from trailer to sailing in that amount of time.  Thankfully the lack of standing rigging radically simplifies the process.

  A few hours time to set up the boat or take it down is also a lot better than the $4,500 it would cost to store such a beamy craft in a boatyard ($4.50 per square foot in some Maine boatyards).  Alternately, collapsing the boat to 12' would bring the cost down to roughly $2,400.

  I personally would abandon trying to fit the boat into a single container while upright in order to get the largest cockpit I could fit into a 12' collapsed beam.  With your fixed roof and clears, that cockpit would double as the main saloon, and I'd want as much space in there as I could get.  Heck, I'd want space for six seated adults even if the cockpit weren't doubling as living space.  I'd also want the interior space for doubles or queen beds fore and aft, as well as some storage space for kit bags (nothing heavy).

  With the windward hull being between 9' and 10', though, fitting the boat into a container would be challenging.  You could conceivably pack it into a high-cube container by using some custom cradles to store the the windward hull on an angle with the leeward hull beneath. 

  In any case, I like what you're doing and thank you for posting the designs.  Any work in this area helps to refine the design process.

       - Mike





Gardner Pomper wrote:

Hi all,

Ok, I have uploaded the modifications to the trailerable PDFs to allow for the different underwing clearance for the ww and lw hulls. This allowed me to add a bench/storage cabinet to the galley area. I also extended the hardtop to cover the flip down walkway, so the drawings show the boat the way it will normally be in the water; the whole 10'x11' cockpit area will be covered with a hard roof, from which roll down clears can enclose it against any weather. This can all stay in place when going in and out of the slip, and there is very little additional work to trailer it this way as well.

I have drawn the visual for putting the boat in a shipping container. I am cutting the measurements very close, so I don't know if that will work or not. I am assuming that I will need a 108" high, top loading container. So far, none of the shipping companies have gotten back to me on what the cost is for a container from Panama to Philadelphia or Baltimore, so it may cost more to do that than to get it delivered. I would still like the option of shipping it to New Zealand. I am not sure yet if this is a boat that should cross the Pacific.

The steering remaings as one of my bigger concerns. I am unclear if there is some way to put the rudders on the beam, while still allowing the boat to extend its beam from 12' to 20'. I am willing to increase the max beam to 14' if this will make a big difference.

The steering of a proa is still unclear to me in general. If I have 2 rudders, and 2 tillers, what happens to the tillers when I shunt? Do the tillers have to flip up overtop of the rudders, since the rudders flip 180 degrees? How do I do that on a boat where the helmsman is 15-20' from the rudders? Do I need to handle both tillers at the same time? Plus, I need to handle the sheets to swing the boom across. How do I do this single handed? Can the rudders be connected together with a fiberglass pole, and then I just have 1 extension tiller to that pole?

I definitely plan on single handing, and so far it sounds like a lot of running around on the tramps, using 4 hands at a time. I am sure there is a better way, but I am not clear on it yet.

- Gardner


On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 1:29 AM, Robert <cateran1949@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

-There is no need to bury the fatter beam all the way through the ww
hull when expanded, only enough to support it. As the loads are
significantly less than the other joins,. it doesn't have to be that
deep, I reckon you could get away with 18" to 2'.The only problem is
beefing the parts up for the compression point loads. The contact
areas are slightly fatter to make for minimum slack at the various
expansion widths, while slightly narrower elsewhere to allow easy
movement between, so the extra carbon is easy to add at these points.
This gives you about another 4' With suitable triangular bracing, you
could reduce the bury to 4" such as on Farrier tris but that would
increase the complexity.

For the bows, I feel a hinged system would allow easier alignment, and
if you need to completely remove them, simply remove the cotter pin
and pull out the axle. Much easier to align the hinge on the outside
for the first attachment than try and push bolts through with someone
on the inside of the hull quickly getting a nut on,
Robert-- In harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au, "Gardner Pomper"


<gardner@...> wrote:
>
> I am not sure what you mean by "how to get another 5 feet". Do you
mean in
> beam or in length? The outer beam already buries all the way through
the ww
> hull to the ww side. Sorry, I am just not following. Can you elaborate?
>
> I was not really trying to shorten the boat for slip storage,
although I can
> see that could help when I rent a slip. I have a dock, so I wasn't that
> concerned with that. I just want the boat shortened for trailering.
I am not
> sure of the max height I can trailer without permits, etc, so 8' bow
> extensions that hinged up would take my height to about 13 feet, which I
> thought was probably too high.
>
> - Gardner
>
> On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 12:12 AM, Robert <cateran1949@...> wrote:
>
> > -I can see how to get another 5 feet or so by making the cabin edges
> > strong enough to allow the outer beam to have a bury of 2' into the ww
> > hull. This would allow the through beam rudders and still have plenty
> > of narrowing for slips. Still reckon a hinge on top would allow the
> > bows relatively easy shortening for being left in a slip
> > You have worked out the tolerances pretty fine. I reckon it should
> > work-- In harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au
<harryproa%40yahoogroups.com.au>,

> > "gardnerpomper" <gardner@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I have posted new versions of my ideas for a 50' trailerable in the
> > Gardner's Layout folder, if
> > > anyone is interested.
> > >
> > > The idea for this boat is one that can be trailered, or shipped in a
> > container, but is ordinarily
> > > left in a slip, so is just collapsed to a 12' beam. This allowed me
> > to basically move the seating
> > > out from the galley area, so that I can have a real galley, as well
> > as a queen and a single.
> > >
> > > I am retaining the idea of bows that remove for trailering or
> > containerizing, because that lets
> > > me put a very long lw hull without the awkwardness of trying to
> > trailer a 50' boat.
> > >
> > > I have absolutely no idea how the steering would be set up on this,
> > how the rudders would
> > > mount, etc. I am hoping that someone can help me out with ideas for
> > that. I would be willing
> > > to go with fixed rudders if I really have to in the leeward hull,
> > but I don't want a draft of more
> > > than 30". Lift up rudders would be preferable.
> > >
> > > Thanks for any feedback.
> > >
> > > - Gardner
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>



__._,_.___
Recent Activity
Visit Your Group
Y!7 Toolbar

Get it Free!

easy 1-click access

to your groups.

Yahoo!7 Groups

Start a group

in 3 easy steps.

Connect with others.

.

__,_._,___