-Your point about the rig lifting and increasing capsizing moment is a valid one, though the narrower beam to some extent counteracts this.
The sailing loads are concentrated in the ww hull with the rudders on the lw side of the ww hull, close to the rigs. This is possible as the rig is more to ww an therefore less load on the aft rudder trying to prevent it rounding up into the wind,
I actually cut out the frames for an Elementarry sized one, but decided to wait and put the effort into a full blown Harry as I don't have the easy trailerability constraint. A 15m/10m Harry would be easier to build, though a bit more in materials
Remember this is for easy trailer sailing to fill the niche of a Jarcat-- In harryproa@yahoogrou
>
> Robert,
>
> Is this preference simply because the weight of the rig will be in the
> ww hull, and therefore add to righting moment?
>
> You might get some slightly cleaner air, but unless your rig height is
> restricted, I'm not sure that's an argument to go atlantic.
>
> The problem I'd see with the weight argument is that, while there will
> be more weight in the ww hull, there will also now be more weight in the
> structure for the ww hull, beams, and lw hull to handle the increased
> sailing and torsion loads that have to be transferred from one hull to
> the other. You might be able to get the same weight and righting moment
> in a harryproa design (more ballast in the ww hull, less weight in the
> structure because it's now simpler).
>
> I can't see that being enough to give up the other benefits of the
> harry design. Having a ww hull free of the rig and structural loads
> would be important to me if I were trailering a small boat -- there's
> little enough interior space already, and I wouldn't want to give up
> anything to the mast. I'd also much prefer the heeling moment to remain
> the same and/or decrease as the hull starts to rise, as with a pacific
> proa, instead of increase (rig gets higher, structure off the water then
> adds to the heeling moment instead of blanketing the sails).
>
> But perhaps the weight of the rig is not the reason for the atlantic.
> Sheeting wouldn't be functionally different from a harryproa, but you
> would be able to play with the halyards and sails without leaving the ww
> hull. Are there other reasons?
>
> - Mike
> / /
>
> Robert wrote:
> >
> > -Not for myself as I prefer the deck space and comfort of a Harry, but
> > if seriously constrained in time for sailing and had to trail a boat,
> > I would go for a narrow schooner monocoque Atlantic 9mlw/6mww with a
> > fold out cockpit, or if I was serious about racing in protected
> > waters, I would go for a carbon Atlantic 9mlw/6m ww with wings to ww
> >
> > -- In harryproa@yahoogrou
> > <mailto:harryproa%
> > >
> > > robert,
> > >
> > > you prefer the atalantic?!
> > >
> > > doug
> > >
> > > --- On Fri, 20/3/09, Robert <cateran1949@
> > >
> > > From: Robert <cateran1949@
> > > Subject: [harryproa] Re: cantarry - racing -
> > > To: harryproa@yahoogrou
> > > Date: Friday, 20 March, 2009, 10:27 AM
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
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