On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 2:06 AM, juggleandhope@yahoo.com [harryproa] <harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au> wrote:
fun to look at and think about.
i'd be a possible buyer for a smaller weekender version (30' or 9 meter) that;a. would be cheaper and lighter
Smaller will be both, although some of the difference will be swallowed up by what is added after the build with the fit out.
b. had less sail to wrestle with (and could be more easily reefed)
A given with the smaller boat.
Most wrestling is with lazy jacks and flaking the sail into a small enough pile to fit into the boom cover. Wishbone rigs don't need the former and as the sail automatically falls between the boom sides where it is held in a string cradle, there is no flaking required and zipping up is easy.
Reefing is very simple as it is always done with the rig pointing into the wind. Halyard lock and block and tackle leech/luff tensioners should make reefing easier than on standard set ups.
Most wrestling is with lazy jacks and flaking the sail into a small enough pile to fit into the boom cover. Wishbone rigs don't need the former and as the sail automatically falls between the boom sides where it is held in a string cradle, there is no flaking required and zipping up is easy.
Reefing is very simple as it is always done with the rig pointing into the wind. Halyard lock and block and tackle leech/luff tensioners should make reefing easier than on standard set ups.
c. the ww hull was ~60% this size, with just one double-bed/table, place for composting toilet
The limits are how much it has to carry, but within that constraint, the smaller the better.
d. could perhaps eliminate the folding hull-ends
These are optional.
e. the pop-top or bimini could be easily extended over the steering position to reduce skin-cancer and rain
Extending the bimini is easy enough, extending the pop top, less so. But adding a fold out shelter for the crew is pretty simple.
f. non-folding version
Simple, and easier to build.
i keep my boat on a mooring. as long as i could work out a way to lift it fully assembled on our club's 3 ton lift, or to disassemble it for lifting (2 or 3x a year), i'd be ok.
It would weigh a lot less than 3 tons, but the reach of the crane may be a problem. Disassembling is easy, but the masts have to come out first, to free the beams.
i could imagine eventually wanting to trailer it a couple times per year (after retiring, perhaps) but the folding wouldn't help with that (as i imagine it would still be too wide, even folded).
I have just received some sketches from Steinar of a 2.4m/8' folding version of the Ex40. Looks a bit different, but could be scaled down to your requirements quite easily.
thanks for sharing this.
__._,_.___
Posted by: Rob Denney <harryproa@gmail.com>
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a new topic | • | Messages in this topic (37) |
.