G'day,
It all looks good to me. I am flat out with the China boats and an
80'ter at the moment so have been watching, but not commenting. Plus,
you guys are doing fine without me. If anything looks wrong, and no
one says anything, I wil add my tuppence worth.
Re the masts. Outside the beam is ok (the China boats are outside and
offset to leeward), probably better as it reduces the interference,
but make sure the boom does not extend too far over the stern or you
will have sheeting issues.
regards,
Rob
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 10:27 PM, Gardner Pomper <gardner@networknow.
> Doug,
>
> The missing lw hull middle section in the Contrarry layouts is so tht the ww
> hull cabins can overlap the lw hull when the beam is contracted for shipping
> in a container. That allows the boat to reduce its beam to 7.5'. And, yes,
> that idea is totally my fault. Rob hasn't really weighed in on it except for
> a general note of approval.
> In the rudder diagram, I am trying (unsuccessfully) to indicate that the
> rudder will raise and lower. It is shown in the fully down position. In the
> fully up position, the knuckle would be right under the beam. This lets the
> rudder shaft and attachments stay fixed when the rudder kicks up. I am
> definitely looking on more feedback on the whole rudder design for the
> harrys. That has always been my biggest area of concern with the
> implementation of the designs.
> I am surprised that I have not gotten comments before on the mast placement.
> They do seem pretty close to the ends of the boat, but I am not aware of
> problems in doing that. I have been hoping someone would pipe up and mention
> any issues that arise from that.
> I am not sure about the reference for your last paragraph. Is this related
> to the mast placement, or are you talking about the sail area? I am all in
> favor of reefing when the wind picks up. My philosophy has always been that
> if I think I should reef, then I reef. it is easy enough to shake a reef
> out. Alot harder to right a capsized multihull.
> Thanks for the input!
> - Gardner Pomper
> York, PA
>
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 2:21 AM, Doug Haines <doha720@yahoo.
>>
>> GP,
>>
>> I don't understand the missing middle section out of thelw hull, why is
>> there the step down - to save weight I guess, but won't it lose some
>> strength. I guess the schooners will reduce that need for strength in the
>> middle of the lw hull, but still it looks a bit odd.
>> Was that your idea, and has Rob replied about ot yet - seems to make sense
>> a bit, maybe not as much as in your drawing.
>>
>> Also the rudder blade needs to be continued up from the surface to handle
>> waves, that is what looks wrong in the picturs of yours.
>> The knuckle would go up near the cross beam.
>>
>> Also don't like the distance from bow to mast but that is a debatable
>> issue.
>> I guess in 10 knots you won't see waves around.
>>
>> I get scared running down our seabreeze fetch, I ease the sheets way
>> forward to lose power and just slide slowly down into the ditch.
>> This is a major seahandling skill to know what limit to accept as too
>> risky.
>> I am sure the other day I could have managed to capsize with an unreefed
>> sail sheeted in. But maybe not, maybe it would of been wet fun, but I wasn't
>> going to find out, reefed down and sneaking around was still fun, but there
>> was certainly potential power available.
>> Sorry to all northern calm windless places who are sailing on mill ponds.
>>
>> Doug
>
>
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe