Multiple comments I've been meaning to send for a while. Many
thanks to Fedor, Nick, Luc, and others for the survey and ongoing
conversation.
TIMING
I'm still sold on the Harryproa design, with eventual plans for a
48' to 50' boat somewhere in between the original Harry and Blind
Date.
I thought I'd have one by now, but my wife and I had a daughter
four years ago that completely threw off our plans. Now we're
focused on building a house, and paying for it, as well as
renovating a Pearson Ensign daysailer for my daughter and wife to
learn on (unsinkable, self-righting, easy to sail, 10' long deep
cockpit that's great for kids).
So the boat that was five years away in 2005 is again five years
away. Give or take.
The only reason for my hesitance is free time and available money.
TRAILERING and DESIGN
The plan is for the largest boat that can be launched and
transported, without being demounted, and without requiring an
escort vehicle.
For the U.S., that means the boat/trailer/mast package being 12'
wide when folded and roughly 60' long (12' x 80' max dimensions for
the boat + tow vehicle, I believe).
Being completely trailerable at 8 1/2 feet would be nice, but we
already have a boat with scant accommodations, and if we upgrade,
we're going to have those queen berths. Since we'd likely only
transport the boat twice per year, and have no plans to trail across
the country looking for new cruising grounds, the goal for
transportability would primarily be to save $4k per year on winter
storage. So we'd be willing to put up with getting a wide load
permit. And if we did want to trail the boat down to Florida to get
a head start on a trip to the Bahamas, we'd still have the option.
The big questions are whether or not to have a stand-up head and a
ww hull with an interior wide enough for a dining table.
The Harry, with its sit-down head, is a lot smaller than the Vis,
even when stretched. There are arguments to go with that: lower
weight, less build time, less windage, and male friends being forced
to use the head while sitting (I do *not* like cleaning up splashes
from friends who think they have sea legs, but really don't). On
the other hand, it's nice to stand while showering.
The dining table is a requirement for the rest of my family.
Since we want an open cockpit like the Harry, that probably means a
narrow table down below next to one of the bunks, with appropriate
hull flair to allow for it. Kind of like an F-boat.
We'd also probably go with a schooner rig in order to get a
questionably-high amount of sail area without going past the 60' max
length for the trailering package.
That gets us everything we want, from fast daysailing that will
replace our Stiletto 27 catamaran, to long-term cruising (albeit
semi-spartan), in a boat that we can get on and off a trailer by
ourselves, without having to resort to an expanding trailer (big
pain -- we're tired of the one we have), which could fold on the
water to fit into a larger monohull slip.
Plus all the advantages of a wtw proa with unstayed masts: lower
cost, lower weight, longer waterline, simpler build, fewer parts,
FAR fewer points of potential failure, weather to one's back, the
ability to shunt instead of tack, the ability to run aground (or
awhale, or acontainer) without ruining the boat due to foils that
pierce the hull...
It's a dream boat. Something that really isn't possible in any
other design. Almost magic.
MARKETABILITY
But that said, I accept that the boat would likely be a one-off
that few people would want to buy. People have come to expect
certain characteristics, and accept certain risks, and these trump
logic. As much as I love the Harryrproa design, any sort of
mainstream acceptance is likely to be a tough climb.
- First, my first guess is that people who want a transportable
boat number much fewer than those who want a trailerable. So my
design would appeal to me, but not to most.
- Second, those who want a trailerable would probably want an
interior like an F-31, with its stand-up head and saloon with
berths/seats and a central table. Farrier and Corsair have done a
good job in shaping expectations.
- With the heavier trimarans, and truly massive condomarans,
expectations for accommodations have blossomed in the past 20
years. This would bias people against a slender double-ended
multihull that's sensitive to weight.
- This would result in disqualification along the following lines
"Man, those accommodations are nothing compared to your average 48
footer", and "that waterline is way too long for the accommodations
you get", and "why would I spend that much for a boat without a
saloon or proper shower?".
- Simply put, people would judge it against the Dragonfly 35 and
Corsair 36 in terms of lighter multis, even though those boats would
cost several times as much. Or on the other end, judge it against a
Seawind 1100, with its patio door and dance floor, even though it's
not trailerable.
- You really have to want to go fast and light, with a long
waterline, and forego the dance floor, to want a Harry.
- Plus, you'd have to have people willing to spend money on an
unusual boat with unknown resale value. Not many people want to be
different or take big risks. Sure, many sailors like to talk about
innovation, especially multihullers with their disdain for floating
lead mines, but most people draw the line pretty quickly. Pretty
much: slightly different within the bounds of a normal envelope.
Like a carbon fiber mast when everyone else has aluminum, or some
lifting foils when everyone else has standard leeway prevention.
Serious innovation tends to scare most sailors, even if they fancy
themselves as innovative counterculture.
- Heck, even the sailingAnarchy folks couldn't really embrace the
idea of a proa that fit their design criteria better than a trimaran
did, and many of the forum members there fancy themselves to be the
innovative anarchists of the industry.
- And then there's the idea of taking a risk on a developing
platform. Buying a Corsair is easy. There are hundreds of used
ones from which to choose, the platform has been proven for decades,
and you know there's a vibrant user community, aftermarket
solutions/parts market, and resale possibility. None of that will
apply to harryproas.
---
I'd love to see these challenges fall by the wayside as more
people embrace the idea of the downward weight-power-complexity
cycle, but that could take some time.
Perhaps my boat, in five years, can help nudge the whole cycle
forward. (and of course, like anyone fond of their own boat ideas,
I can envision transporting the boat to shows, paying for space, and
demonstrating how cool it is...)
Maybe we should think about finding ways to squeeze the queen
berths and saloon table into a truly trailerable boat, along the
lines of Dennis' origami masterpiece or Gardner's Contrarry. That
would probably quadruple the number of people who might be
interested. Hmm.
- Mike
Hi Luc, All
agree and....
if even this group which tends to be following a while and fairly at the 'forefront' still has some questions - I think it is fair to assume the larger audience has them. So something to try to 'solve' that perception is probably worth it. (at the end more boats sailing is the ultimate proof of course)
Building on your point of 'work to be done' for proven elegant solutions for trailer sailor (or at least 'size reduction')I was wondering if a form of 'crowd sourcing' would work. I think if say 10 people chip in $500 to accelerate proof of 'folding ends', sliding/rotating beams, or even the 'extendable wing mast'. I think that money would be saved 3 fold when I would have my HP built. And for the first person taking the risk it may be a nice incentive to try.
Nic - would very much like to see what you/Rob are working on.