Hi,
I also think that no rocker is the best for our purpose. I just had to
think about it once more when I read what Mr Erik Lerouge wrote about
hulls and foils. I respect him very much as a boat designer.
Yes, Ono is our boat. I think ww hull without rocker is probably better
for cruising program because it has more displacement. I f you can ceep
ww hull light, some rocker is probably better. First I wanted to have
more weight on the ww side. Now I am going to move our 100 litre water
tank and all extra stuff inside lw-hull to make ww side a bit lighter
easier planing .
Also going to build a pair or daggerboards.
I really want to have the autopilot too.
Rudolfs Jefa bearings look nice....
Regards,
Arttu
> arrttuu,
> you build the ono?
> how is it's rocker?
> seemes better for turning n]maybe.
>
> when going straight line - should be flat bottomed.
> Doug
>
> --- On Mon, 24/8/09, proabuilder <arttuheinonen@
>
> From: proabuilder <arttuheinonen@
> Subject: [harryproa] rocker vs straight hull shape
> To: harryproa@yahoogrou
> Date: Monday, 24 August, 2009, 10:52 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Which shape is better for lw hull?
>
> Many people think a hull is faster without rocker, as on trimaran
hulls. Many racing trimarans have rocker on main hull and straght side
hulls.
>
> But... straight hull does not give much hydrodynamic lift when the
nose is pressed as well designed rocker hull does , or does it??
>
> On a proa to have some hydrodynamic lift on forward of the mast would
be an advantage, or would it? any comments.
>
> I am not 100% convinced about having main hull without rocker.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Arttu
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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