I have not argued against the "longer rides smoother & travels faster"........... I have an aviation background (home building), and know very well about the wrong side of the weight curve, and all the repercussions that come from adding weight.........It really is not so different.
In assessing what I intend to do, which is fairly long term live aboard world voyaging, NOT confined to the tropical lattitudes, and not confined to the popular places and routes, and the budget I have to work with, I arrived at a 30' cat as offering the most for the least boat. It is sufficient boat to go anywhere in the world safely and in reasonable comfort, a fully enclosed bridge deck cabin with decent all around visibility, and a hard dodger over part of the cockpit, and the flat ride of a multihull, decent payload to carry the things needed for a great deal of self sufficiency, more than adequate galley space, and indoor workshop space for minor stuff, enough berth space to take on the occasional crew, a modest rig size that is easily handled (junk rig). It will not be the fastest, or the smoothest, and will weigh more per foot LOA, but no more based on the useful space and accomodations. Over 16 sq meters in just the 5 main internal spaces spanned by the bridge deck cabin (on the 8.6M boat. That does not include the head, pantry area, and stowage spaces fore and aft, or the outdoor areas such as cockpit and foredeck, tramps, etc. The difficult thing with this much space is not to fill it with crap. I'm a northerner, and will probably spend significant time well beyond the temperate climes. Good shelter and indoor space to do things matters to me. Even in mid summer, nights can get cold off BC and the Alaska Panhandle.
Weight is what brought me here........ the savings from sandwich versus plywood, and the attraction of having an insulated hull, that is also sound deadening. The possibility of saving 800 to 900 pounds (400kg), which translates into that much more I can carry within the 3000kg displacement to waterline. Cost WILL be higher, even if I can employ significant amounts of XPS. There is far more glass, and significantly more resin, even with infusion. Clearly the simple box mold shown in Rob's videos does not work here, as multiple curved surfaces intersect, but if it is possible to infuse an entire side, half bottom, and part of the top, reducing seams, building in rebates for bulkheads and such, this would save both weight and cost, though the time to build the complex molds will be significant.
Rob sold me on infused foam sandwich instead of plywood........ though I really was ready to be sold. I will be experimenting with some infusions this fall. I have almost nothing to go on as far as how to successfully infuse complex shapes. The "canoemaran" I'm building....... currently on the back burner.... seems an ideal place to do this, as I need to build two amas. I may have difficulty explaining to people why my amas have a far more complex shape than necessary ;-) It also didn't take much of a push to get me to begin seriously looking at putting the mast in one hull........ Mast location is a problem, and that's actually a reasonable solution......... I've toyed with many, and not been entirely happy with any of my ideas.
H.W.
On 05/31/2018 10:37 AM, realink@iprimus.com.au [harryproa] wrote:
Longer is better arguments are a total waste of time when longer is not on the table. Many boats have been and continue to be built by home builders that are in this size range and smaller.
Longer is faster and rides better, this isnt a difficult proposal to absorb. I think what you are saying is you expect all the variants and choices are the same length, well they shouldn't be, This is a problem in two parts,
First is what can you afford to spend. In the ratio of pounds per foot a proa is going to win. It only has the narrowest of lee hulls with little in the way for accommodation in it, pretty much half a catamaran. Less pounds equals less money. Add to that these particular boats do with a much shorter materials list, less sail, smaller masts, less rigging, no ballast. Less cabins so for extended periods less crew, less water less battery power, Less weight is less horsepower to drive it, and less fuel on the same duration.
Weight is a cascading influence that effects everything you can think about with few exceptions. Yet s ome expences are going to be equal, for example on the same mission requirements electronics, instruments. And so, operating on the same budget will see you get more boat per dollar
The second is how large a boat can you fit in a build facility, this is completely dependent on your circumstances unless you can find a build space and an assembly space for the lee hull. You will find when you need to be creative you will also be including more money as in the first part.
If you can only fit a 35ft hull and your requirements are global with many lucky friends, you are probably looking in the wrong space. If you need a weekender, or something where you will be crewing short handed and are interested in cruising, you feel as though you need to manage the money you have to maximise boat length, a proa should be an outstanding choice.
I wouldn't ever pretend these boats are for everyone, boats are such esoteric animals they me an different things to different folks. But in the practical sense I think everyone should give them a look before they dismiss them
Posted by: StoneTool <owly@ttc-cmc.net>
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a new topic | • | Messages in this topic (112) |