YEah, no, there's no way you can beat that long lean leeward hull of ours - if you can get flying. Even if Pacpro is flying it is still no competition. I mean a modern PacRuss whatever may do better, but those old plywood things wouldn't stand a chance.
No competition.
You would have to make an old plywood Harry and then go race than - I mean what the kark are people trying to argue about?
Harry versus Farrier, Chris White etc is closer to the mark surely.
This is the only two forums I am recieving and so imagine that perople are across more than these, but it is not a good covering of the whole sailing scene to get bogged down in some old odd proa thing.
Proas would be pretty much dead if Rob hadn't made a new one.
Doug
From: Mike Crawford <mcrawf@nuomo.com>
To: "harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au"
Sent: Tuesday, 13 September 2011 12:46 AM
Subject: [harryproa] Re: Russ Brown
Oops. I misread your original post, and thought that you said that the pacific design would allow more accommodations _than_ a harryproa. Not having done the analyses that you have, I figured that you were right; you'd know more than I would. Of course, that's not what you meant, but I figured you deserved the benefit of the doubt.
I definitely agree that it would be nicer to have a 1500 lb harryproa with cabins and a galley than a 1000 lb spartan craft. We have similar goals.
I'm not sure which craft would win a race. Apparently no one is, though many are convinced that their untested theories are true.
For the sake of discussion, I'll buy the idea that the pacific proa might have the edge in lighter winds. In a steady five-to-ten knot wind for a whole race, a good crew on the
pacific proa can definitely minimize wetted surface area.
But to argue against myself:
- The greater rm at the same weight would favor the harryproa at higher wind speeds.
- The flexible mast would favor the harryproa by allowing more sail to be kept up at higher gusts, keeping up the average speed between gusts.
- Along the same lines, the harryproa could theoretically edge out the pacific craft even in light winds because it will be able to more safely carry a massive amount of "overpowered" sail area. That could make up for differences in wetted surface area. It would require more reefing an unreefing than a smaller sail, but this would still involve less effort than constantly balancing a 20% windward hull.
- A shunt-heavy course might also favor the
harryproa in any wind speed, particularly if the race is single-handed.
- If the wind varies over the course, the harryproa might have an advantage because it takes much less effort to optimize, and therefore is likely to spend more time sailing at least at 80% of ideal trim.
- I also don't know the full story regarding drag. It's possible that the pacific craft, despite being able to minimize drag on the windward hull, will have more total drag -- the V hulls and daggerboards may end up creating more drag than the heavier harryproa windward hull. But I'm too lazy to try to figure this one out.
Regardless, while a harryrpoa would be my choice, I still like both designs. And I have a special appreciation for what Brown has done in terms of re-introducing the proa to the west. It's disappointing that people want to turn
the comparison into a religious right/wrong argument.
- Mike
Mike,As usual you have stated the points I would have liked to make. More clearly than I could have. I would, however, like to take exception with the statement "For that I'll take the extra weight of the Harry". I have a Harry design that gives equal accommodations and hull length which weighs no more that Madness. I don't agree that Harryproas are heavier than pacific prows, despite the larger windward hull. It is possible to save enough weight on the rig and windward hull to compensate for the larger, but still lightweight, windward hull.The point of robs which I have my doubts about is that a Harry would beat a Russ brown proa in a race. For pure speed, it would seem that the ability to shift weight and fly the outrigger at nearly any windspeed would give the pacific proa the edge as a pure speed machine. I would think that drag on the harry's windward hull would slow it down.Overall, though, I agree with you. I can have a 1000 lb Harry with Spartan accommodations like Madness, or a 1500 lb Harry with two private cabins with private heads, full galley and standing headroom throughout. I will go with the slightly larger boat for not that much more money.- gardner
Sent from my iPhone<<I have to admit, from all the redesigns that I have gone through with the harryproas, that it definitely seems like more accomodations could be put in a 1000 lb harrypro>>
True. The Harry will have a heavier windward hull because it will be longer, have accommodations, and require enough waterline/depth to handle those accommodations. The Pacific proa can keep the lee hull close to the weight of a Harry and then go with that tiny windward hull.
The Pacific/Brown design is a good way to go if you want the ultimate light-wind sailing craft, and are willing to put up with a stayed mast (rigging, stresses, points of failure, risk of bad things happening when caught aback, limited sail orientation, etc.), and look forward to balancing the boat as winds change.
And I don't say that snidely -- people have been using stayed rigs for thousands of years, and pacific multihullers have been balancing their craft forever. For some, that fun of maxing out one's speed while balancing the weight is not a detraction, but is actually *the* point. It's fun.
I think it's great that CLC worked on this craft and is making it more available/accessible to the world at large. I like their other proa, too, and am curious about their rudder design.
---
Personally, though, I'm looking for something one step up from this design. I've had plenty of fun balancing weight, and since I have a small boat for doing that, the larger boat will have other requirements, particularly safety and convenience.
Which brings me to the Harry with its unstayed mast in the lee hull. I suppose you could try this with the CLC design, but reinforcing that hull without goofing up the accommodations would be a serious challenge. In any case, I'd have to lean towards the Harry because:
- One point of failure on the mast.
- Totally depowers at any point of sail at any wind strength.
- No shrouds to affect where the sail goes when running.
- More weight to windward for when the wind picks up.
- Less balancing required; more easily controlled, handled, and depowered by inexperiernced or injured crew.
- Ability to lie in irons, for long periods of time, at any angle, with the sail up, or while reefing it. I can't tell you how stressful it is to try to reef a lightweight overpowered cat single handed when the wind suddenly becomes much to strong.
- Easier lazy sailing.
- Mast depowering in gusts.
For that I'll take the extra weight of the Harry. Which is NOT a knock against the CLC design. It's a great boat, as are Brown's designs. It's just not what I'm looking for if I'm going to take my family out of sight of land.
- Mike
__._,_.___
.