Speed is important, but so is resisting pitching. The
harrys are very pitch resistant, but this is as much due to centring all
the weight and not having anything on the hull ends or up the mast as
it is with the hull shape.
Bridge
deck clearance is another subject with plenty of nuances. On
bridgedeck boats, the less the clearance, the lower the hull topsides,
which trades off windage against wave impacts.
On the Cruiser 50 it is 950mm/38" at the lee hull and 600mm/24" at the ww hull. This is viable as, on a proa, the ww bridgedeck does not see the wave impacts the lee deck does, except when motoring straight into the waves, when speed is low.
On the Cruiser 50 it is 950mm/38" at the lee hull and 600mm/24" at the ww hull. This is viable as, on a proa, the ww bridgedeck does not see the wave impacts the lee deck does, except when motoring straight into the waves, when speed is low.
We have been sorting out the build
sequence for the ww hull and cabin of the Cruiser 60. This has further
simplified the layout and increased the floor clearance. I expect this
will follow through to the 50 as well.
I have also
completed the materials list for theC60. Works out to $Aus50,000/$US35,000
dollars for all the composite materials. Quite a surprise as this was the amount spent on Rare Bird (Visionarry 50) 10 years ago. The C60 figure does not include wastage, which was in the Vis cost, but the wastage will be less on the infused C60 than it was on the cedar strip Vis.
__._,_.___
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 (13) |
.