Subject: [harryproa] Re: Atlantic vs HarryProa... and structural.
From: Mike Crawford
Date: 8/3/2010, 12:22 PM
To: harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au
Reply-to:
harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au

 


  Oops.  I should not have said "downwind from the cockpit".  "Not as far upwind as the windward bows" would be more accurate.

        - Mike


On 8/3/2010 11:56 AM, Mike Crawford wrote:

 


  I believe it would work the way you diagram it.

  However, the bows are traditionally foam-filled semi-nonstructural parts of a Harryproa, while the beams are about the strongest things on the boat.

  If you're anchored in a big blow, or perhaps working with drogues or a sea anchor, you'll probably want your anchor rhode connected to something bombproof.  The beams work for that, and also allow you to run your lines downwind from the cockpit (easier to see and work with, out of the way of curvy bits).  You might also be more likely to have an anchor storage box along the beams instead of at the end of the boat, both for convenience and weight distribution reasons.

  On the Atlantic version, you'd need to beef up your bows to handle dynamic anchoring loads, and also come up with a scheme to run lines through or around the hull.  It's not the end of the world, but it might be heavier and/or less convenient.

        - Mike
 


__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
Visit Your Group
.

__,_._,___