# Open letter to yachtdesigners of the world



## Grona hisse (Jun 2, 2013)

What happened to the good family boat?
An open letter to the yacht designers of the world.

I have for some time been looking for a new boat. I'm looking for a normal boat for normal use.
The season is in my case from April to October. This means that I will encounter different types of weather and temperatures. The last gives the hull shall be insulated in any form, both the heat and coold.

Where is the family boat that can take on some weather, and with a nice type of hoby-hoursing. Was fairly quick, had a good check properties, and possible could hold the course. Was balanced so that you could be able to leave the rudder a short time. Family boats had in the old days a keel worth the name.

In Sweden we can’t compete today in mass production of boats, we have to small volumes, and the boats will be too expensive. Thus, there is also no second-hand market to speak of. There are a lot of good boats that leaks in different places, boats that do not have a shower or even a door to close to the toilet, etc. But that's not what I'm after.

One may quietly wonder why it has become in this way. I firmly believe that we can be as good if we want, by offering a product sailor in common wants. I mean in an international perspective. All sailing does not occur in the archipelagos, and when they do it, there is a lot longer between islands. It is a lot more winds abroad than in the Swedish archipelago. It's about creating a new niche in the boating world, FLD (Family Sailors for the long haul).

It is primarily for a comfortable and safe boat, a boat that you can rely on in most weather.
It's about a boat, in which all crew members can feel secure.
Boats where teak deck has been replaced by Treadmaster mat, non-slip and not leaking, saves weight and less costly.

It is not about a boat that will be planing out on the water at 20 knots with water spouting up to the spreader of the mast, which require a full-fledged professional to helm and handle. After the third broach that transforms the cabin into a cement mixer, the family crew patterns of in pure protest. Then it doesn’t matter how many boating magazines that are placed in strategic locations.

To chart an archipelago may sometimes result in lack of time and resources to forget a rock, which is not good for the modern boat, the fin keel has a tendency to unfold itself as a center table. Half of today's yachts should pay higher premiums for the benefit of the second half, so maybe we can get rid of the worst variants, of keel fastenings and drawing/building instructions. This way of thinking can of course be adaptable to whale collisions and so forth.
The modern boats have a tendency to have instable heading, to say the least. It may be that they are fast downwind, But tacking away from a lee shore, these huge sterns aren’t designed for it. As the swim platform they work beautifully. But it was the sailboat that was to be debated.
The pitching hard one to two reefs. The skipper thinks he's out on a real adventure, but it's not so bad, the water is still plain, not striped. May God help him, when the wind increases? All weight high up must be counteracted by a keel weight of 25-35 times depending on type of boat.
The modern boat has a keel weight of at best 30 percent, why this? Everyone knows that a boat with 43-47 percent keel weight moves a lot better in open water. In addition to a restful time for the crew, the boat will withstand more weather.

If I suggest a Colin Archer design, so all laughs. Everybody knows that it is heavy and slow.
9 knots with a CA40 is not so bad?

When Colin Archer designed his yachts they had to be seaworthy and able to withstand foul weather. Everyone knows that he succeeded. Canoe stern was because it would break the breaking wave from behind and divide all the water. Today's boats are pushed down into the next wave, where the risk is imminent that the bow diving, boat tossed around, and the lack of keel allows the rig falls apart.
I have personally witnessed the North Atlantic Ocean and the English Channel during full scale gale conditions; it is not a pretty sight. We can conclude that it isn’t the waves that are the problems. It is the breakers that cause the problems. Tens of tons of water that roars across the deck, and treat the boat like a glove. If boat is modern, it has a point, as the water flows out through the rear deck (kitchen door).

Thus, we can state that we should not compromise with Colin Archer boat's strength. But the requirement that the weight will be reduced by 50 percent for the hull and deck remains, in favor of the keel weight. This could be achieved through Aluminum Composite. This is by year 2013, not any novelty.

Personally, I am absolutely convinced that it is possible.
Since Colin Archer designed his boats a lot of water has passed under our keels, but he was back in those days a genius. The development had for centuries stood still, before he started.
It is therefore important to modernize Colin Archer underwater body, so that the boat meets the water line length. I feel that a number of racing rules have made today's boats into toys. I need a tool created.

Colin Archer boats are safe but unfortunately unduly wet, why freeboard should be raised a foot or two . Otherwise it will be out of a demand from the foreign customers.
Today's front underwater body with its large flat surface allows the boat to pound into the waves, the stop becomes so powerful, that the mast dancing hula-hula on the deck even though the rig is correctly applied. Will the rig cope with this?
We start with the features of stem in the water body, shared lateral plane, skeg that protects and supports the helm. Sure, this means that the draft will increase. Clearly the boat will be able to dry out safely, able to stand on the keel. The keel is provided with a wing, not at the bottom. She should be able to heave to in a safe manner.

The rudder is moved in under the boat, this must be balanced. Everyone in the crew should be able to steer the boat.
The rudder shall be so designed that it helps autopilot and wind vane.
Cutter rigged ketch it sounds the best sense for the family, there will be more but smaller sails to handle. Reefing is done by the main simply taken down. The remained staysail and mizzen holding a bit up in the wind register. So when apart from the jib, all sails to be "self-tailing".
Modern boats are usually equipped with hydraulic winches for hauling and windlass, this might fit if you are looking gaff rig, except that it generates greater sail area further down. Two simultaneous hoisting winches great, same for the mizzen. The masts consist no longer barked spruce. We use aluminum profiles. The masts will stand on the deck, it's a safety issue. Supported underneath with a solid steel profile.

As most understand that I strive for a comfortable holiday boat for longer voyages, I have additional comments about the decor. One toilet and one shower sufficient aboard a boat. This also applies to charter boats. They should be placed in stamping center. It is absolutely forbidden to put the toilet seat in such a way that the user should not be able to relax, nor shall sea and wind be able to cause the contents of the bowl into the foul weather gear trousers. Separate shower cubicle is preferable. Given the new Swedish and foreign future rules should sleet and septic tank to be adapted to the crew 'needs, be generous in volumes.
The new boats double berths has nothing to do with good sleep or safety. Proper sea bunks is preferable to sea, I mean really functioning. Including fastening for security belt. The galley will be a place where you can get support, so it is workable, including safety harnesses. It should certainly not be of the kind type a long ship worktop.
The fabric could be Perstorp, considerably cheaper than mahogany and teak, also provides a bright interior. Provided with a beautiful strip materials, it may be just as well. Easy to keep clean.
The deck is fitted out with light prisms, so that the interior remains bright.
Then stowage facilities should be provided for private things, there must be drawers, absolutely no gaps under the mattress, where someone sleeps.
Since I do not believe in a design where you place everything in the stern, engine, crew, anchors, ropes and 2 cubic utility gadgets, I prefer the cockpit in the middle. Under that I have placed the engine and generator / hydraulic pump, all in a space that makes service easy.
There should be a separate tank to fuel the kitchen and heater.

On the hard, and winterization give my variation of the boat, a keel that makes the handling on the dry easy. My boat has such a powerful hull not struts push the grp hull during severe weather. This is especially true if you want to take yacht up on the hard with the mast on. 

It is my hope that the international yacht industry should learn from mistakes and produce the boats that people want. Where the family can get a consensus on the choice of boat. 
A boat with one steering wheel thanks.
Sincerely


----------



## deniseO30 (Nov 27, 2006)

Doesn't sound like a boat I'd want. (If I can understand the rant) All that aside, welcome to Sailnet!


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

As I read you rant, I generally understand you objectives, and find myself generally in agreement with many of them. But when I look at your solutions and critiques, they come closer to reflecting out of date dogma rather than reflecting the science behind yacht design. 

Where we agree is that the smaller boats that I see coming out of Europe seem to be moving in the direction of open class style race boats, and I don't see that as a positive. But I have sailed traditional designs for much of my life, and where.we are at odds is that these traditional are not all that easy to sail, are wildly expensive to build and maintain, offer rolly motion,pitch more violently(there is no such thing as a good, hobby-horsing motion), and offer no real advantages in terms of safety or sailing ability as compared to a moderately conservative modern design. 

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## manatee (Feb 27, 2013)

George Buehler Yacht Design Home Page
Buehler's boat designs and building methods are derived from the workboats of America's Pacific Northwest coast. They're built like tanks (one took no harm from being hit by a seaplane), designed for comfortable cruising, and have been built & sailed all around the world. His 'Backyard Boatbuilding' is a good read, with plans for quite a few boats included.

Parker Marine
Parker's boats are based on the sharpie-type workboats of America's Northeast coast. They are shoal-draft, centerboard or leeboard, flat-bottomed (most modern ones are slightly arc-bottomed), fast, and relatively easy & cheap to build.

Parker's 'The Sharpie Book' has a history of the type, building info, photos and plans. His 'The New Cold-Molded Boatbuilding' has construction details, photos and drawings on making a strong, light boat.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

And, I'll bet you want it to be really, REALLY _'affordable'_ as well, right? 

First off, your letter should be addressed to the yacht _MANUFACTURERS_ of the world... And, I'm sure they would assure you, that there is precious little market for such a boat in today's world, certainly not enough to warrant production on a large scale... Modern Production boat building has become all about _Interior Accomodation_, and very little else... No way could the current American New Boat market, for example, be convinced to embrace a Colin Archer-style design, but with more freeboard...

Like Jeff H, I'm in agreement with much of what you desire... But the reality is that precious few families want such boats today, even a contemporary builder of designs of the sort of 'moderation' you seem to be getting at - Pacific Seacraft - is barely afloat today, their primary business is refitting their older boats, virtually NO ONE wants to buy a brand new Crealock 37, anymore... Now, the Pacific Seacraft 38 that Bob Perry drew up a few years ago, I thought that was a pretty cool boat that might be emblematic of the sort of niche you're talking about, I'd love to see PSC try to put that boat into production... We shall see...

Sneak preview of new Pacific Seacraft 38.5 - Cruising Anarchy - Sailing Anarchy Forums










And besides, the world is already full of stuff close to what you seem to want - they fall under the general heading of _'Good Old Boats'_...

Oh, and good luck convincing today's sailing public that deck prisms will be sufficient to allow light below... Haven't you heard, folks today want freakin' _Picture Windows_ cut into their topsides, for chrissakes...


----------



## LinekinBayCD (Oct 19, 2009)

I chartered 33' & 35' Scanmars circa 1980 when they were being imported to the US from Sweden. I thought they were great sailing boats with well laid out interiors for a family with several kids or two couples. Fractional rigs, moderate fin keels, skeg rudders all well balanced.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Will design for food.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

bobperry said:


> Will design for food.


Oh come on. What would you know ?


----------



## JulieMor (Sep 5, 2011)

JonEisberg said:


> Modern Production boat building has become all about _Interior Accomodation_, and very little else...


Don't forget wide spacious cockpits with little to grab on to when the boat heels in a puff and sends the occupants flying across the expansive void.


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

JulieMor said:


> Don't forget wide spacious cockpits with little to grab on to when the boat heels in a puff and sends the occupants flying across the expansive void.


WHAT?!? You mean those marina queens are intended to be SAILED??? Surely you're joking.. they'd spill their champagne.  

Now that bow-thrusters are de rigeur, I guess the next technology we'll see will be active stabilisers (to stop the boat heeling, of course...)


----------



## chall03 (Oct 14, 2002)

bobperry said:


> Will design for food.


In steel???


----------



## JulieMor (Sep 5, 2011)

Hartley18 said:


> WHAT?!? You mean those marina queens are intended to be SAILED???


Haven't you seen the pictures? You know, the ones where the guy from the "Hair color for men" commercial is at the helm and the rest of the crew are his granddaughters and their friends. 

On a more serious note, a recent ad in SAIL had Beneteau describing their Sense as having "cat like" qualities. The room of a catamaran and the sailability of a monohull. Beneteau owns Jeanneau and Lagoon too. It's easy to see where they are going.


----------



## Grona hisse (Jun 2, 2013)

To deniceO30 If you read it once more slowly you might understand the rant, and get the general picture of a safe boat that is easy to handle.
To Jeff H Why roly motion? As you very well know there are different types of motion behavior depending on the design. There is no such thing as a good, hobby-horsing motion. Most of today’s boats fall under motion category stress and diabetes. I believe that we were talking FLD Family cruiser for long distances. They come closer to reflecting out of date dogma rather than reflecting the science behind yacht design. Sorry to have to tell you that the science of today’s only reflect the racing rules. Has it ever occurred to you that actually were a Fastnet race tragedy? Something classified as a giant dhingy is not what I’m looking for. The Vikings designed that type a long time agoo, and they were good for real speed.
To Jon Eisberg It is the yacht designer, that creates building specification, and so forth. It is up to him to check, that the yard actually follow up on his specification, and isn’t trying to save money through weaker constructions. There is usually a binding contract between the parties. They don’t want it because it is too expensive. With today’s global economy it only needs one yard, that can produce a long serie of a yacht. Picture windows, what does that has to do with safety thinking?
To LinekinBayCD “I chartered 33' & 35' Scanmars circa 1980”, good for you. If you had bought one you would by now know, that the fastening of the keel and the GRP specification, has a lot more to desire.
To TDW It seems to me that there are more nutrients needed, both minerals and vitamins.
To Bob Perry I know you design for food, but a bottle of bubbles won’t hurt you.As I see it there is a lot of conservatism among the yacht designers of the world. Everyone tries to copy a selling idea into his own project. It is now time to think beyond the Viking freighter. A yacht that is safe with a hobby-horsing that is gentle to all of the crew. The problem for you is that you need to find a yard with ultra-modern manufacturing technique.
To Julie More I’m positive to your thinking but it is not only a question of the cockpit area. Many injuries is due to the fact of foul weather trousers is missing in the pantry. And this has to do with yacht motions.
To Chall03 We have already established that steel is out of the question due to its weight.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Groans:
" It is now time to think beyond the Viking freighter."

Apparently you are not very familiar with the range of my designs. I have designed a few "Viking freighters" in my time but I have also designed boats that over the last few years have been winning the Swiftsure Race consistantly including ICON, NIGHT RUNNER and the FD10m. You could hardly find a more diverse group of fast boats and none of them could ever be considered "Viking freighters". Your overall view seems a bit myopic to me.


----------



## RobGallagher (Aug 22, 2001)

100K for a decent specimen in that lovely design of yesteryear and another 150K (+/- 150K) for a complete refit and you have a new boat.

Or, as Bob Perry has offered, for the price of more than one large pizza you will get a design that has everything you want. Take it to the builder of your choice. You will have everything you ever wanted.

I think your real problem, the one you are not telling us about, is money.

It's OK, most of us have the same problem.


----------



## manatee (Feb 27, 2013)

> If I suggest a Colin Archer design, so all laughs.Everybody knows that it is heavy and slow. 9 knots with a CA40 is not so bad? When Colin Archer designed his yachts they had to be seaworthy and able to withstand foul weather. Everyone knows that he succeeded.


"I've always loved the Colin Archer and Bill Atkin double enders but they are expensive and difficult to build and there was no way, especially back when I was a young guy chomping at the bit to 'get out there' that I could ever afford to buy one, nor did I have the skills to build one. But I loved the look.

The solution was what I now call my Vagabond boats; double enders, low and sleek, cutter rigged. I think these boats are the essence of the ocean cruising sailboat; sort of the 'Volksboat' or "Every Man's" cruiser. They ARE obtainable, if you have the energy, or perhaps courage is a better word, to get off your tail and do it. The original was a 26' cutter, the first JUNO." ~ George Buehler

George Buehler Yacht Design Home Page


----------



## Sabreman (Sep 23, 2006)

Ummm..... I'm having a difficult time understanding the rant, it's not very specific while using a lot of words. Can the OP provide an example of a boat that they consider acceptable? _Spray_, perhaps?

Personally, I find the characteristics of modern hull design to be an amazing evolution of science and materials technology. The reality is that boats suffer far less breakage at sea than ever before. And while we may read of a few examples of accidents at sea each year, considering the sheer volume of boats on the water, technology has made coastal and offshore boating far faster and safer than when I started in the 1970's.

Speaking of the 70's, I worked a few boat shows for two Catalina dealers. Almost without exception, people coming aboard a boat dive below to look at the accommodations. Very few spend more than a few moments on deck. That was 40 years ago, people are people and it has nothing to do with "modern" design or "modern" desires... unless modern is defined as anything more recent than 1960.


----------



## jak3b (Apr 24, 2011)

Heres a real modern Norse 'freighter';
Home


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

JulieMor said:


> Haven't you seen the pictures? You know, the ones where the guy from the "Hair color for men" commercial is at the helm and the rest of the crew are his granddaughters and their friends.


Yeah... but I thought they were only motoring - into the sunset in <5kts and flat water.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Grona hisse said:


> To Jeff H Why roly motion? As you very well know there are different types of motion behavior depending on the design.


When you talk about traditional designs, its hard to avoid large roll angles. The comparatively high vertical centers of gravity and low centers of buoyancy meant that there was comparatively little dampening, and the heavy spars meant that there were large roll moments of inertia carried up high creating the likelihood of excitation rolling.



Grona hisse said:


> There is no such thing as a good, hobby-horsing motion. Most of today's boats fall under motion category stress and diabetes. I believe that we were talking FLD Family cruiser for long distances.


It sounds like we agree that there is no such thing as good hobby-horsing. I don't know what the sentence about modern boatss falling in a category of stress and diabetes. Its not really English. But within the realm of moderately conservative modern design, the have been huge advances in addressing motion comfort, boats which roll and pitch at slower rates and through smaller roll angles than more traditional designs, which is not to say that there aren't also stripped out race boats and more agressive designs with less comfortable motions. These more conservative modern designs work well as family cruisers.



Grona hisse said:


> To Jeff H They come closer to reflecting out of date dogma rather than reflecting the science behind yacht design. Sorry to have to tell you that the science of today's only reflect the racing rules. Has it ever occurred to you that actually were a Fastnet race tragedy?


I am very familiar with the lessons of the Fastnet Tragedy and the huge advances in scientific understanding which has occurred in the 34 years since. While race boats tend to reflect the racing rules, and there are aspects of cruising designs that are derived from the lessons learned from race boats, for the most part the design of modern boats largely reflect the lessons learned from the Fastnet and the scientific studies which followed. These newer boats are safer, easier to handle, often have more comfortable motions and are faster than anything which came before. You should try to learn about the science behind the better of these designs, and spend time sailing boats of a variety of periods before condemning them.



Grona hisse said:


> To Jeff H The Vikings designed that type a long time ago, and they were good for real speed.


The Viking ships were amazing technology for the bronze age. They were ingenious and fast for their time. But they required large crews to operate, went missing routinely, and took enormous skill and strength to sail. They were dog slow in most conditions compared to modern designs, had limited up wind capabilities, and would be very limited as a family cruiser. The bronze age was a long time ago and a lot has happened since....

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Yeah, what Jeff said and,,,,no enclosed head.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

bobperry said:


> Yeah, what Jeff said and,,,,no enclosed head.


Real men don't need no door on the head.  Hell, real men need no more than a bucket and a piece of wet and dry sand paper.


----------



## Delirious (Dec 16, 2001)

> What happened to the good family boat?


For what purpose and what body of water? Give me a blue-water passagemaker and it would be next to useless in the Finger Lakes - though we have Tayana 37s and Babas on the lake that are lovely but outmatched for light airs. I probably tack more in a day than some passagemakers do in a month. I need a boat that points well (lakes are long and narrow with N/S aligmnent and a prevailing West wind), is fast, can handle chop more than long waves and will allow tucking into anchorages or marinas that have a five foot depth. Also, if I can't be underway in 15 minutes for a three hour daysail it's probably going to just be a tight cottage.

Happily, a few canals and we're on the Great Lakes and a few additional locks takes us out into the Atlantic for some coastal hops.

The good news is there are LOADS of capable designs from the 80's that can be had. I may never work my way up to the new designs. ;-) Pearson Triton #1 (1959) is at the lower end of Cayuga Lake and a good design that adapts well to sweetwater. That was the original "family cruiser" in fiberglass. Now it is tiny.


----------



## Grona hisse (Jun 2, 2013)

To Delirious
First of all I would like to make it quite clear that this is all about a family cruiser for long distance voyage, e.i. Scandinavia/Europe to the West Indian Islands. As you know, gentlemen do not sail towards the winds. However, If the occasion should arise, as an act of good, it is the captain that have the full responsibility. We are certainly talking about ocean crossing. This voyage should be done in some style and comfort, and the woman aboard would definitely demand door to the head. We can establish that Finger Lakes is not the place alone this yacht should be designed for. However 9 knots half wind isn’t all that bad, without modernized hull under the waterline. It should be fun to sail everywhere. There is never a problem to sail away, they usually starts when heading back home. Big circle route from Florida to north or south of British Islands. This suggests that she is to be built in a way, so that she actually can take on some wind. Some, even over the bow. And in extreme cases handle a breaker. I do think, you by now, have realized that I’m talking about an all-weather boat and big open sea, where survival is the most important. That is why I’m desperately looking for a yacht with a decent keel-weight ratio. The southern parts of the Baltic Sea have a particularly choppy sea. Many Big ships have learned that the hard way. I believe the same goes for the Great Lakes.
Tacking with this boat isn’t a problem, since the Jib is the only sail you have to bother about.
So how many of these old-timers have blister-damages, leakage in deck and so forth, frost damage due to water in distance material, or just weak distance material. Cracked up interior, due to violent hobby-horsing, and insufficient hull strength.
What I’m trying to get across to you, is the following question: Is today’s yachts the optimal work tool for extended cruising, family style.
What is wrong with aluminum composite as a building material?


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Groan:
What does "aluminum composite" mean to you?

Here is a boat of mine that I would call "aluminum composite" but I'm not sure what you mean.
This a modern family cruising boat owned by a very experienced cruising family. It is a thoroughly modern yacht in every respect, very fast, easy to sail and very capable.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

To OP- take a look at the Onvi, Boreals and L+M boats if you're into Alu. Very different then the old C.A. boats but actually used for the purpose you describe with great success. I'm new to my boat but have done some long hops and have seen some weather and am extremely pleased ( outbound 46). Steve at PSC has the molds/tooling for the 40 and 44 and it hits all your requirements as well but in glass. There is a Valiant 50 still in the shed in Texas that may please you as well. Rustler still makes classic looking boats but they do blue water without a hiccough. Morris will still make you an Able 50 which may appeal to you as well. Problem is they all will sail circles around an C.A. boat and have moved on from the Norwegian lifeboat design look.
Problem is the market for the boat you describe is very small. You may get a small semi production run vessel or have the pleasure of hiring Bob and having done your way but the right way. Think you and Bob should talk . If you look at his portfolio he designs great looking boats that are purpose built.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Out:
I'm not sure the Groaner is the right client for me. He talks in vague generalities but he seems to have his mind made up. I want clients that are open to my ideas and respect my ideas. Building a custom boat has to be fun for everyone. I'm happy to argue about the color of the seat cushions but I don't want to argue about the design of the keel or the rudder or the rig or the hull shape. In fact, I don't give a rat's patootey about cushion colors. I'm at the point in my career where from now on out each boat I do has to reflect what I have learned over the years. I'm pretty sure the Groaner is not ready to deal with my "idiosyncrasies",


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Sorry. Thought I could get him to see the light


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

The thing which has ceased to amaze me about the internet is that there are so many people on it that if you sit around and watch long enough you see the same types of people show up over and over again. Grona is a type who has been here many times before. He longs for the past, and is certain that the past must be a shining light to the future. His post strikes me as a seeking validation for a set of ideas which are valid if taken in context, but which are being presented out of context. 

The reality is that there are lots of designs for boats like Grona is looking for. Their drawings are readily available in museums. The materials still exist to build these designs as they were conceived, or in the hands of a decent design-build yard, and with the guidance of a knowledgeable designer, they can be adapted for other materials. But no matter what material they are constructed in, boats like these will not be unexpensive and certainly will not be within the budget of an average family. Nor will the meet the needs iof an average family, especially an average family that happened to have the the time and money to cross oceans. 

As others have suggested, Grona it would really make sense for you to take some time and learn about how the science behind yacht design has evolved in the past 30 years. There are some excesses which has produced boats which would be of little interest and use to you. But there has also been a better understanding of how to build stronger, more seaworthy, more comfortable, faster, and more durable designs than had been available when I started sailing in the early 1960's let alone in the days of wood and iron boats. 

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## jak3b (Apr 24, 2011)

I like this color for cushion covers.Easier to keep clean.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Love those chusions Jak.

Out:
I don't think Mr. Groan wants to see the light. I think he wants to see the heavy.

I've done it all. The alu cutter YONI, 50'LOA, weighed 50,000 lbs. with 20,000 lbs. lead. It wasn't exactly what I wanted but I designed it for a repeat client who I knew was very fixed in his requirements and,,,a good friend. I truly appreciate you pushing Mr. Grona towards me but tend to think he's not ready yet.


----------



## RobGallagher (Aug 22, 2001)

bobperry said:


> Out:
> I want clients that are open to my ideas and respect my ideas.,


I guess I won't be hiring you for that carbon fiber Jacuzzi with a tiller, wet bar, pulsating shower head, trampoline and permanent 20 degree angle of heel.

It's all about my needs. Just ask my last 10 girlfriends.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

I like girlfriends.
I like tillers.
I like girfriends.
I'm totally down with pulsating.

My left knee has been pulsating all day.
I just need someone to get it in sync with.


----------



## RobGallagher (Aug 22, 2001)

bobperry said:


> I like girlfriends.
> I like tillers.
> I like girfriends.
> I'm totally down with pulsating.
> ...


I know a girl...

This could go so off topic...


----------



## Grona hisse (Jun 2, 2013)

To bobperry
Re. Yoni
Let us have an open discussion. You may and should correct me, if I’m wrong in my remarks.
The thinking behind you and your client’s thinking seems to co-inside with my thinking of a good offshore yacht. Is this remotely anything you would design for yourself without client wishes? We are now talking serious offshore sailing.
I must confess that she is staggeringly beautiful. However I have some possible safety features that I would like to take up in this forum. 
The keel weight ratio? Heavier than 45 percent.
Keel fins?
The third of the front isn’t V-shaped enough. And evidently she will pound into the waves.
Vent hole in the hull – a matter of safety. 
Sincerely
Big windows, in the deck salon, a matter of safety.
On vital item is missing, i.e. the solid link between the keel and the mast on deck …
The rudder isn’t balanced.
The skeg for course stability is missing, the rudder fens is too small. They all interact with each other.
Finally! Aluminum vs Aluminum-composite as building material, a comparing study hard to find on Internet. What are your thoughts?


----------



## Grona hisse (Jun 2, 2013)

To Jeff H
It is shorly a lot easier to comment the writer than the facts.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Mr. Grona:

No YONI is not what I would design for myself. It's way too elaborate a boat for me. I'm a man of very simple needs so long as they include a good dog and a great hi-fi.

You make a number of errors in your assessment of YONI:
Ballast to displ is 40% and that is more than sufficient. 
Limit of positive stability is 134 degs.
Yes, the keel is a straight fin just as it should be.
The hull has high deadrise from amidships forward. It is very V-ed. Client requirement.
I have no idea what a "vent hole" in the hull is. It does not sound like someting i would want. What are you venting? I like to vent but I usually do it over on Cruising Anarchy.
Big windows are .25" safety glass. More than adequate.
The mast is stepped on the keel as the drawing clearly shows. There is an elaborate alu framework to spread out the mast loads. That's one of the beauties of alu construction.
Yes, the rudder is not balannced. Client requirement.
There is a large skeg (what boat are you looking at?)
I have no idea what a "rudder fens" is. Can you explain please?

YONI is all alu and not composite.
WILD HORSES is an alu hull with a composite GRP and carbon fibre deck. I would call that composite.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Grona hisse said:


> To Jeff H
> It is shorly a lot easier to comment the writer than the facts.


This quote clearly demonstrates the point that you are trying to make in your quote. Instead of addressing the technical points that I raised, you are attempting to dismiss the writer, which you are correct, has proven to be very consistent with your arguing style.

But in any event, I do admit that I am a slightly guilty of the same crime in that I have commented both on the technical aspects of your discussion points in moderate detail in my post (#20), and on the apparent nature of your comments as a preamble to my comments in post #29.

And while I would be delighted to have a discussion of the technical issues with you, it does not change the fact that your comments so far seem to be poised in a way where meaningful discourse is discouraged, and instead seem to be seeking validation for your opinions by aggressively dismissing anyone who tries to engage in meaningful, if contrary, dialogue with you.

Still, the majority of my comments even in post #29 are intended to assist you in better understanding the nature of what you are proposing by suggesting that you spend some time learning about the current state of yacht design and construction so that you make less anachronistic statements. (i.e. Your condern about composites blistering. Blistering has not been a problem with the better yards in decades.)

Jeff


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Grona- Just curious. ?Have you done any blue water? Have you spoken with and picked the brains of folks who have ? I tried to do due diligence before building my current boat. Most all the folks I spoke with who have actually "been there and done that" don't share your views on ballast ratios, hull shape, appendages etc. ?Must be a reason? Had pleasure of input from folks who could have designed and built or bought what they wanted. This is not a conspiracy by production boat builders. I grant you many do not go to the large production builders for voyaging boats but those who don't still don't build the boat you envision. ?Why?
Excessive ballast slows the boat down, requires larger rig/sail plan making for less safety, may require powered aids to sail and high ballast/displacement ratio may have negative impact on comfort motion. Your fixation on ballast ratio is misplaced. Agree that ability to resist turning turtle and staying there is important but this single number is not. Positive stability and area under the curve are more relevant.
Full keel may have negative impact on sailing ability- both pointing and wetted surface.
Non balanced rudder increases forces required to steer fatiguing autopilot or helmsman and likely will increase parasitic drag.
Many factors of which the rudder is only one go into ability of a boat to tract. For instance Boreals use daggerboards aft and tract like trains even downwind.
Currently designed balanced spade rudders can be and are as strong or stronger than skeg hung rudder of old.
Sistership of mine had rudder but not keel run into the rocks at speed. Boat was hauled, rudder straighten, back out sailing. With skeg hung whole thing would likely need a re build and the season gone.
Grona, if you make the effort to speak to voyaging sailors who have built or had built for them boats in recent times I doubt you will find them incorporating the features you seem to want. ?why?
Aluminium is a great material for voyaging boats please look at some recent boats built for that purpose. Then come back to this forum and share your insights.

P.S.- you may also wish to look at prior threads concerning this issue and especially Jeff's discussion of the pluses and minuses of various building materials.


----------



## Grona hisse (Jun 2, 2013)

"You make a number of errors in your assessment of YONI:
Ballast to displ is 40% and that is more than sufficient. Limit of positive stability is 134 degrees”.
I agree that this is the normal case. But is the keel composed by an aluminum profile or is it filled with something that actually makes it heavier. When I look at the Internet version of Yoni drawings it is a bit hard to see what it is all about. When I talk about it I mean keel weight ratio and the difference is ballast ratio. In the last scenario the weight will be situated a lot higher and consequently be less “effective”. When hull has a 134 degree angle, it generally means that rig and sails are under water, and therefore needs “extra help” in order to turn the yacht right again.
Vent holes, sorry for bad English, I meant the windows under deck line in hull side.
Regardless safety glass, will it hold in survival conditions.
I’m sorry about the mast stepped on the keel, it does not show on the Internet drawing. My point is being that the mast should stand on deck in order to prevent big holes in the deck if dismasting. In order to take the load on the deck from the rig, there should be a solid piece of backup between the deck and the keel. Another reason is that the lightning can pass down to the keel construction, and thereby avoid the big explosion that derives from the gap.

Finally what are your thoughts on aluminum composite material in general? Is it the future within yacht building material? 
Rudder fens is in my view the piece that protect the rudder from debris in front of the rudder. Wouldn’t it be safer, to have this constructed in a way that it could shelter the entire rudder from the immense power of downhill/downwind sailing. By balance the rudder one can assume the port handling with motor will be a lot easier, and we shouldn’t need the bow thrusters on a sailing yacht.
Sincerely


----------



## Grona hisse (Jun 2, 2013)

To Outbound.
I'm just trying to get the best boat as far as familiy long distance creuising is concerned. It doesn't matter who I am, the questions are still ligit.
Sincerely


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

grona- I'm going to drop out of this thread and suspect others will too. You seem blind to what others say. A conversation implies a two way communication. You obviously have not paid attention to any of the content of prior posts. Bye now.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Grona:
You have a lot to learn. You are full of opinions based on a paltry knowldge of yacht design. Take some time off SN and do some studying on your own.

For instance:
Of course the keel is fille with something heavier than aluminum. Are you joking? Do you really know so little? I like to call it "ballast". I'm hoping the name sticks. The ballast is in fact lead, 20,000 lbs. of it. How can you have a ballast to displ ratio if you don't have any ballast.

Of course the mast is keel stepped. Do you really think a deck stepped mast is better for an offshore boat.

I think you are all talk. Just talk. You simply do not know enough to be considered a good candidate for a design.

So be quiet, lurk and listen and maybe in time you will know a bit more.
If you get bored being quiet you could strike up a conversation with Brent Swain whe he gets back on.


----------



## jak3b (Apr 24, 2011)

Maybe he is Brent


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

jak:
That's exactly what I was thinking.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

No, Grone is not Brent. IPA's are not even close. Grone is definitely posting out of Sweden.


----------



## jak3b (Apr 24, 2011)

Brent welded together his own network out of scrap stainless.


----------



## duchess of montrose (Nov 26, 2011)

While i agree that many of the production builders today build boats to a clientele that want a large floating condominium and therefore the only consideration is interior space there is a reason for this. The purpose of a yacht for the majority of people in the market for a new boat is essentially to have something that is akin to a cottage people often entertain at the dock on it they might take it out 1 or twice in a year never anchoring it but always visiting other marinas and they motor most of the way. For that use alot of the modern hunters and catalinas are built for there purpose. Beneteau is interesting because they have a first line which is much better built and has wonderful handling characteristics. You being from scandinavia however should know of Najad, sweden yachts and Hallberg rassy. These three builders build phenomenal yachts which have completed many circumnavigations, perform very well and are very well built. I personally own a rather heavy, boat with a decent ballast ratio and a very stout skeg hung rudder, however, because of advances in boatbuilding technology and engineering it is actually possible for a quality builder to make boats which are very strong and dont have awfully slow underbodys and rigs. If I had the money my ideal boat for the same purposes as you would be a hallberg rassy. I know my next boat will be one of there older models. Also the colin archer boats often had comparatively bad ballast ratios since you seem to make that a very important point to you alot of the older full keeled boats have barely over 30 percent ballast and often in less dense ballast such as iron which is ok but not as god as lead or iron and concrete which is definitely not ok.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

Jeff_H said:


> ...
> Where we agree is that the smaller boats that I see coming out of Europe seem to be moving in the direction of open class style race boats, and I don't see that as a positive....,
> Jeff


Jeff, all styles of cruisers are coming from Europe.

If you want a boat based on a solo open boat, with its advantages and disadvantages, you can take your pick. If you want a boat on the modern IMS/IRC live of hull development, with its advantages and disadvantages you can take your pick. If you want a boat based on classical or traditional lines, you can take your pick.

For any type of boat you have plenty of options. It is up to you to find out what sailing and cruising characteristics are more up to your desires, tastes and personal needs.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## Jaramaz (Aug 9, 2013)

There was some speculation on Mr Grona Hissen, who he is and so on. Well, I have no idea, but I have some knowledge many of you do not have: swedish.

Grona Hissen is refering to Gröna Hissen, which in its turn is a disgusting sweet, green drink (gröna = green). 









Here comes a guy calling himself the name of a disgusting drink, claiming he wants oldfashion (simplistic) values in a boat. Somewhat inconsistent.

And no, no Brent. Not at all.

/J


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

JulieMor said:


> ...
> 
> On a more serious note, a recent ad in SAIL had Beneteau describing their Sense as having "cat like" qualities. The room of a catamaran and the sailability of a monohull. Beneteau owns Jeanneau and Lagoon too. It's easy to see where they are going.


And that is true. It means that they have much of their stability taken from the hull form, that sail with very little heel and have a big interior.

Recently several sailors on Open60's whose hull served as reference for the hull of that boat sailed many thousands of miles at relatively high speeds till the finishing line, without a keel (that they had lost on collisions). I would say that those boats have some cat like characteristics. With a narrow boat you would go turtle quickly without a keel.

What it is needed to know is if those characteristics, besides sailing with little heel and providing a huge interior space offer advantages in what regards sailing and safety.

In what regards safety those boats besides having an huge stability due to form stability have enough ballast located low enough to provide a good final safety and a decent AVS, offering in that respect a big advantage over a Cat.

Also in what regards sailing downwind and reaching they are very powerful and fast boats that curiously are not that bad upwind. I had some difficulties in believing that, me and the testers, but they had to agree that the boat was not particularly bad upwind. Of course in bad weather upwind in what regards comfort and sea motion it will be another story and the boat will be considerably less comfortable than a narrower boat.

That boat offers many advantages and some disadvantages but "regarding to see where they are going" I don't know what are your answer to that but in what regards most sailors it is easy to see where: To a boat more suited to the vast majority of cruisers in the type of sailing performance, interior comfort and space. Benetau is the biggest boat builder exactly because has been able to provide to sailors the right type of boats to fulfill their needs.

If you are like me and the sailing program of that boat will not suit you, you just have to chose the Benetau First 45, also a great cruising boat that in design typology and sailing characteristics is much the opposite to Sense 46.

But what market shows is that there is much more sailors to whom the program of the Sense 46 suits than the ones that will be more happy with the First 45 or a boat with that type of hull.

Here you have a boat test by a conservative tester from a conservative magazine (Yachting Montly). It seems a fair test to me and as you can see the speed figures are quite good for a cruiser:






I believe it will be a very nice boat for the ones that live aboard all year long and a boat that will satisfy the majority of cruisers that use their boats most of the time in coastal conditions with occasional offshore passages and vary rarely with one or two ocean crossing, cruisers to whom performance and sailing fun is not as essential has having a great inside and outside living space.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## duchess of montrose (Nov 26, 2011)

Relying on form stability was one of the issues that caused the fastnet tragedy, there were obviously other important factors but i wouldn't call form stability necessarily a safety feature. Another thing i don't like about many boats is that they often have wheels in smaller boats a wheel adds unneeded stress on the cockpit floor has a weaker connection to the rudder, usually requires there to be sensitive hears or wires depending on the arangement protruding into the rudder tube and clutters the cockpit. In a boat that is less than forty feet I don't ee a wheel as necessary or desirable that's another advantage of the smaller hallberg rassy there smallest model a 31 footer has a tiller. Also contessa 32's would be a good choice for him which is another boat which comes optionally with a tiller and is still made even though it is an older design, and which does not rely on form stability. I personally dislike the beamy design of many race boats i had a neighbor who had a mini and I just dislike the idea of having a boat that relies so heavily on form stability with a keel with such a weak attachment to the hull. I have no issue with bulb keels in fact they are very good for stability by placing a large portion of high density ballast at the deepest part of the keel, but i think a cruising bulb that is attached over a decent surface area is much better than a racing bulb which often is attached over a very small surface area making it much more prone to damage, failure and concentrates loads on a much smaller area. Canting keels in my opinion however are even worse than these because the attachment to the hull is at a pivot point which is inherently weaker.


----------



## duchess of montrose (Nov 26, 2011)

That being said beamy boats which cary there beam aft do go well downwind which is a huge benefit.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

duchess of montrose said:


> Relying on form stability was one of the issues that caused the fastnet tragedy, there were obviously other important factors but i wouldn't call form stability necessarily a safety feature. ...


Hum...it seems you did not read or understood what I wrote. I have said:



PCP said:


> ...
> In what regards safety those boats besides having an huge stability due to form stability have enough ballast located low enough to provide a good final safety and a decent AVS, ...


But I can try to be more clear:

A beamy boat with lots of form stability with a low CG provided by ballast has a bigger overall stability than the one from a much narrower boat with the same B/D ratio, the same type of keel and draft, the same weight and the same length. That means it will be necessarily a bigger breaking wave to capsize the beamier boat.

Tank studies have showed that the beam of a boat has a direct influence regarding the size of the wave needed to capsize that boat. Bigger beam, bigger wave, all other factors remaining the same. This has not only to have with the superior static stability but with the superior dynamic stability, being the beamier boat more able to skid sideways dispersing the wave energy in other way than not in a rolling movement.

Off course a beamy boat can have for sailing purposes less ballast than a narrow boat due to his much superior hull form stability and that can be a risk if the boat is not well designed. A well designed beamy boat has to have the amount of ballast needed to have a low CG to provide a decent AVS and a good final stability, namely a big RM at 90º.

The Sense 46 has all of that, I mean huge form stability, decent AVS and big RM at 90º. Some of the boats on the Fastnet, even if not so beamy didn't. Some had AVS angles as low as 90/100º. Most of all that had to do with a stupid ratting formula that gave advantage to boats with low stiffness and those low AVS characteristics. That has changed a lot (today ratting formulas demand stiff boats) and RCD does not allows class A boats without a decent AVS.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

duchess of montrose said:


> That being said beamy boats which cary there beam aft do go well downwind which is a huge benefit.


Narrower boats too even if they don't rely so much on form stability and therefore will tend to roll more. Anyway a beam pulled aft is a big benefice for going downwind being the boat narrower or beamier (less roll, more hull form stability). We cannot say the same in what regards going upwind so some compromise is needed here if upwind performance is to be maximized.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## duchess of montrose (Nov 26, 2011)

PCP said:


> Hum...it seems you did not read or understood what I wrote. I have said:
> 
> But I can try to be more clear:
> 
> ...


That is true however the flip side of that is that a beamier boat even with the same type and amount of ballast is less likely to right itself because that same stability lends itself to making the boat more stable in an inverted position whereas a narrow boat will recover much more quickly. This can minimize the chance of a capsize leading to a turtling of the vessel. A beamy boat however will take larger momentum to right and will right much more slowly. It is well known that a contessa 32 survived fastnet and was one of the only boats in her to survive now the contessa 32 was not designed to the IOR rule like many of the other boats were, and is a rather narrow boat with a decently deep keel and a massive ballast to displacement ratio. There are pro's and there are con's to every boat design but I personally think moderate beam is superior for an oceangoing boat. I don't think that the boats used in ocean races are the best as offshore cruising boats, i would rather have a properly engineered fin keel spade rudder design that has a cruising fin and a skeg supported rudder and moderate beam, because while ocean racing boats have superior speed and handling they are more vulnerable and for the most part cruising boats should be designed to need as little maintenance as possible because repairing finnicky systems in foreign ports is a PITA which is fine when you are racing and have unlimited funds but a cruiser racer or cruising design shoud be much more worry free. Also beamier boats have greater windage when heeled as demonstrated by the wingnuts tragedy a few years back.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

duchess of montrose said:


> That is true however the flip side of that is that a beamier boat even with the same type and amount of ballast is less likely to right itself because that same stability lends itself to making the boat more stable in an inverted position whereas a narrow boat will recover much more quickly. This can minimize the chance of a capsize leading to a turtling of the vessel. ....


Yes it is true that a beamier boat that needs a bigger breaking wave to be inverted will also need a bigger wave to return to its feet, but I confess that I do not understand how *"this can minimize the change of a capsize leading to a turtling the vessel"*. That does not make sense.

The narrower boat with less overall stability will be more easily inverted and when inverted will need a smaller wave to get back to its feet.

Nobody wants to be inverted in first place and during a roll many bad things can happen and almost always the mast is lost.

Each case is a case but what is normally looked as good regarding overall stability is the proportion between positive stability (the one that resist a boat to be inverted) and negative stability (the one that resists a boat to return to its feet). The positive stability should be big and the negative stability should be proportionally smaller by a very considerable margin.

Another important factor is the max GZ at 90º meaning a big RM proportionally to the boat displacement. This will put the boat quickly on its feet after a knockdown and will prevent the boat staying for a considerable time on its side, vulnerable to the next wave.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

Classic30 said:


> WHAT?!? You mean those marina queens are intended to be SAILED??? Surely you're joking.. they'd spill their champagne.
> 
> Now that bow-thrusters are de rigeur, I guess the next technology we'll see will be active stabilisers (to stop the boat heeling, of course...)


already have those. they call them multi-hulls.


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

Jeff_H said:


> The Viking ships were amazing technology for the bronze age. They were ingenious and fast for their time. But they required large crews to operate, went missing routinely, and took enormous skill and strength to sail. They were dog slow in most conditions compared to modern designs, had limited up wind capabilities, and would be very limited as a family cruiser. The bronze age was a long time ago and a lot has happened since....
> 
> Respectfully,
> Jeff


have to correct a few issues, there. migration age northern eurpoean history/culture/religion/and technology is my specialty.

first. the vikings didn't do their thing during the bronze age. the bronze are had ended centuries before that. they had steel swords.

viking ships came in a few shapes. the main two are long ships and knorr. a long ship is a long, narrow war ship. very fast boats. they had large crews because they were war ships. it's hard to be an effective military force if you only show up with five guys.

knorrs were sturdier, and slower, working vessels. they were designed to carry cargo. their beam to legth ratio wasn't as long and skinny as the long ships, since load carrying was their reason for existing. they had relatively small crews.

despite what you hear a lot of people on sailing sites claim as a fact, viking long ships sailed up wind very well; 45 degrees to wind. a lot of people like to say they rowed upwind because they couldn't sail upwind. totally bogus. long ships had a lot of oars. they used these oars because, if you are planning a surprise raid, you don't want a very visble sail to give you away too soon. so, you lower the sail and you row in to the shore to be attacked. stealth.

knorrs, which are not quite the fine vessels that the long ships were, only had 4 oars. they used these for maneuvering around dock. they didn't need them to row upwind because they could sail upwind.

asa far as being dog slow at any point but running, nothing could be farther from the truth. the great innovation of the long ship is in it's hull, which was the first hull which allowed people to finally truly sail upwind.

actually, as far as seafaring vessels are concerned, the ships of the vikings were amazingly seaworthy. modern identical replicas of these ships have been sailed around the world, several times. they are fast, good to weather, their flexible hulls deal with heavy weather extremely well.

as far as ships being lost, i believe ships have been lost since the beginning of sea travel. they didn't have GPS or weather reports or motors or the ability to call the coast guard. considering the fact that they sailed all over the world and into uncharted waters, you can't really say that they had an undue amount of lost ships. most of the ships that have been found under the water, and raised, were originally sunk on purpose, as a blockade.

popular modern'myth' isn't the same as historical fact. you see that kind of 'information' being stated over and over in sailing sites. i see the same thing in the modern fencing community; denigrating medieval swords as being heavy and clumsy, when nothing could be farther from the truth. i think there is a tendency for us to think we are the *It* as far as human intelligence, ability, and technology and we support that idea by denigrating what came before us, regardless of the real facts. i, personally, think we can learn a bit from the technology of the past. we aren't the summit of humanity, just one step in a long journey.

for anyone interested, here is a link to some actual long ship info from one of the long ship replica sites.

http://http://hem2.passagen.se/hakanlar/


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

captain jack said:


> have to correct a few issues, there. migration age northern eurpoean history/culture/religion/and technology is my specialty.
> 
> ....
> viking ships came in a few shapes. the main two are long ships and knorr. a long ship is a long, narrow war ship. very fast boats. they had large crews because they were war ships. it's hard to be an effective military force if you only show up with five guys.
> ...


If you are a historian specialized in Viking history you should have a better knowledge about their boats and sailing abilities. In fact you need not know anything about History to know that a long boat with its square basic sail cannot sail properly upwind. Stating that boat can make 45º degrees to the wind makes no sense at all and show that you don't know much about sails and sailing.

45º degrees to the wind is a performance that many older cruising boats cannot achieve and it is the performance of a modern cruising boat. That angle was not yet possible 600 years later (not even close) on a XV century Caravela, the best upwind boat of the age of discoveries, a boat with a latin rig appropriated for upwind sailing.

*"There is a suggestion that the rig was sometimes used in a lateen style with the top cross spar dipped at an angle to aid sailing to windward i.e. the spar became the luff. There is little or no evidence to support this theory. No explanation is offered as to how this could be accomplished with a square sail as the lower reefed portion of the sail would be very bulky and would prevent even an approximation of the laminar flow necessary for windward sailing."*

Longship - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Regards

Paulo


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

PCP said:


> 45º degrees to the wind is a performance that many older cruising boats cannot achieve and it is the performance of a modern cruising boat. That angle was not yet possible 600 years later (not even close) on a XV century Caravela, the best upwind boat of the age of discoveries, a boat with a latin rig appropriated for upwind sailing.


Good point, but I must admit being rather surprised how well square-riggers (well, one tall ship in particular) could sail "upwind". It was more like a close reach, but with the long keel giving a good grip on the water and the square-sail clewed down hard with the right shape and at the right angle, IIRC around 60-65 degrees was possible.


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

PCP said:


> If you are a historian specialized in Viking history you should have a better knowledge about their boats and sailing abilities. In fact you need not know anything about History to know that a long boat with its square basic sail cannot sail properly upwind. Stating that boat can make 45º degrees to the wind makes no sense at all and show that you don't know much about sails and sailing.
> 
> 45º degrees to the wind is a performance that many older cruising boats cannot achieve and it is the performance of a modern cruising boat. That angle was not yet possible 600 years later (not even close) on a XV century Caravela, the best upwind boat of the age of discoveries, a boat with a latin rig appropriated for upwind sailing.
> 
> ...


before you take the effort to try to insult and denigrate another person's knowledge, perhaps you should gain some knowledge from an actual reliable source. despite the fact that i included a link to a site by a group that actually built and sails a longship, you chose to go to a site where you don't have to be an expert or have any credentials or authority to post articles; where information is not verified for accuracy.

first, since you seem to think that you know so much more about sailing than i, you must be aware that sail design is not the only element of sailboats that facilitates upwind sailing performance. hull design is an integral part of sailing performance. the longships had an incredibly efficient windward design.

i am sure, with your vast knowledge, that you are also aware that the vikings had an invention called a beitass, which kept the luff tight, when sailing to wind. the beitass was not used later, in history.

however, there is no historical evidence that the vikings used tall square sails. none.
there have never been any sails found in any of the ships that have been discovered. there is no physical evidence of any sails, from viking finds. in the 1800s, there was a Danish effort to build a longship and sail it to North America, for columbus day; a kind of tongue in cheek tribute to Columbus day. the build was behind schedule and, to save time, the builder used a square sail from a modern ( for the time ) tall ship.

since that day, viking ships have been portrayed with tall square sails. except for one. you should have checked out the link i put in my post. anyhow, while there is no physical evidence of any sail from the vikings, there is the evidence of their art. in viking art, they do not show ships with tall, narrow square sails. they show them with a much different sail; one that is trapezoidal, with the head wider than the foot, and is three times as wide as it is high ( almost as wide as the ship is long ). this sail solves a few mysteries presented to historians by the gokstad ship that couldn't be solved with the tall, square sails that have been represented as viking sails.

i didn't just pull the 45 degree figure out of my ***. unlike you, i posted a reliable source.

also, you may not realize this, despite your expertise, but northern europe didn't abandon the longship because of performance. the dutch came up with a boat called a cog. the cog was much like a tub with a sail but it had very high sides and a raised deck in the front and rear of the vessel. these raised areas often had embattlements. quite accurately, a cog was like a castle on the water. naval battle, in those days, was strictly boarding actions. it was much harder for crews in the low longships to scale into these new floating castles and defenders in the cog could throw things down on the boarding warriors. like many things in boat design, the change to a different design was influenced by something other than performance.

the cog affected ship design for hundreds of years. however, although the longship fell out of use, fishermen in Scandinavia and even in Germany, along the Rhine, used versions of the smaller boats, faerings, that the vikings used. these designs were similar to longships, although not identical in hull form, and are still used today.

but, you know, i don't know anything about the subject. i will have to go to wikipedia and do some reliable research before i post, next time.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

captain jack said:


> before you take the effort to try to insult and denigrate another person's knowledge, perhaps you should gain some knowledge from an actual reliable source. despite the fact that i included a link to a site by a group that actually built and sails a longship, you chose to go to a site where you don't have to be an expert or have any credentials or authority to post articles; where information is not verified for accuracy.


You mean this link that does not work?

http://http//hem2.passagen.se/hakanlar/



captain jack said:


> ....
> i didn't just pull the 45 degree figure out of my ***. unlike you, i posted a reliable source.
> 
> .....


I don't know what type of sail they used on that "replica" but it is not for sure a rig from the IX century. 45º to the wind is a performance of a modern sailboat. The evolution of sail design don't come backwards but forward. Saying that a boat from the IX century had already a sail performance that was only reached again on the XIX century, 1000 later is plain ridiculous.

The vikings had not be obliterated from the map and they are not a lost civilization all their knowledge was transmitted to the future generations and certainly such a huge improvement would not be lost.

The fact that with the actual sailing knowledge you can put a sail on a long boat that allows it to sail relatively well against the wind is only possible because today you know enough about sails and sailing to do that. You did not have that knowledge 1000 years ago.

Maybe you can give some credible evidence of what you are saying, I mean credible academic work that support that theory regarding the Viking lost (for 1000 years) knowledge to sail very close to the wind.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

PCP said:


> You mean this link that does not work?
> 
> http://http//hem2.passagen.se/hakanlar/
> 
> ...


and you know the sails used in the 9th century, sails which we have never found an example of, because you are psychic or maybe have a time machine?

give me a bit. i can use the link in my favorites to access the site but i can't get a different link than the one i posted.


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

PCP said:


> I don't know what type of sail they used on that "replica" but it is not for sure a rig from the IX century. 45º to the wind is a performance of a modern sailboat. The evolution of sail design don't come backwards but forward. Saying that a boat from the IX century had already a sail performance that was only reached again on the XIX century, 1000 later is plain ridiculous.


I wish I could get 45º to the wind sailing upwind.. but my old tub isn't exactly "modern" either.


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

this link works. go on the site. chose the flag that represents the language you want. click on hull construction and start reading, there.

http://http://hem.passagen.se/hakanlar/

here are a few quotes from other sources:

about the beitass:

In order to sail close to the wind, the Vikings 
employed a simple bar-like tool known as the beitass, which allows the edge of the rectangular sail to be 
held out. By experiment, these devices have been shown to allow the Viking ships to sail effectively against 
the wind. (Wooding, 1996)

on viking ships, in general. a quote from :

Featuring excellent helm balance, dynamic stability
characteristics, and driven by an easily controllable square
rig sail plan, the resulting lightweight and high speed vessel
obtained a level of performance still to be challenged by
most modern sailing yachts--- the Norwegian marine technology research institute


----------



## ShoalFinder (May 18, 2012)

Sigrid Storråda, a sailing replica off the Viking Longship Gokstad

(Captain Jack had one too many http:// I know it's obvious, but anyone who doesn't try very hard would think that link he posted was broken)

That is a really cool site. Thank you for sharing that one! (I did have some trouble with the menus which kept taking me to what appears to be a Norwegian adserver site.)


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Paulo- I continue to find it interesting that you advocate for the current design trend for beamy boats with beam brought aft and twin rudders these boats require. I note the beautiful and very functional boats Bob posts on this forum are either extremely narrow like his Sliver design or of modest beam like the PSC ketch or more recent one off sloop. 
I know "gentlemen don't go to weather" but find I hate engine noise so frequently do go to weather. I know you have an iron stomach but find I and my crew enjoy a gentle ride allowing some fancy cooking underway and nice peaceful sleep. I know weight is the enemy of speed but find with each passage or trip to the chandlery or tool store my boat ends up with more "stuff". I realize the mass production boats meet the needs of the average sailor and "money talks BS walks" so the good cruising sea boat is increasingly a niche market. Still, that market exists and for production/semi production runs is being filled by HR, Outbound, Morris and the like. The original poster is way off base in some of his opinions in my opinion but he is correct that given the current market boats that utilize advances in naval architecture and construction but still have the blessing of being moderate in all features but are at a reasonable price point are increasingly rare. I realize this is because the solid construction and durability of these boats doesn't come cheap. Still, given this market continues to be durable in hard and good economic times it is a shame one of the big production houses does invest in the tooling to make these boat more approachable for the general market.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

" didn't just pull the 45 degree figure out of my ***. "

Oh, good. I take it this is a contest and we have to figure out what a "***" is.

Three letters,,,,,,ear?

Paulo knows what he is surrounded with and he knows it very well. He is amazing at digging up info on the latest yachts. But maybe his expoerience is limited to a specific kind of boat, say one with a big fat rear end. That's fine but the benefits of narrow boats have been known for many years and I have been involved professionally long enough in tis busines to learn not to ignore any of the various types of boats. They almost all have their strengths and weaknesses. I do not GENERALIZE!

Did I win the contest?


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

outbound said:


> Paulo- I continue to find it interesting that you advocate for the current design trend for beamy boats with beam brought aft and twin rudders these boats require. I note the beautiful and very functional boats Bob posts on this forum are either extremely narrow like his Sliver design or of modest beam like the PSC ketch or more recent one off sloop.
> I know "gentlemen don't go to weather" but find I hate engine noise so frequently do go to weather. I know you have an iron stomach but find I and my crew enjoy a gentle ride allowing some fancy cooking underway and nice peaceful sleep. I know weight is the enemy of speed but find with each passage or trip to the chandlery or tool store my boat ends up with more "stuff". I realize the mass production boats meet the needs of the average sailor and "money talks BS walks" so the good cruising sea boat is increasingly a niche market. Still, that market exists and for production/semi production runs is being filled by HR, Outbound, Morris and the like. The original poster is way off base in some of his opinions in my opinion but he is correct that given the current market boats that utilize advances in naval architecture and construction but still have the blessing of being moderate in all features but are at a reasonable price point are increasingly rare. I realize this is because the solid construction and durability of these boats doesn't come cheap. Still, given this market continues to be durable in hard and good economic times it is a shame one of the big production houses does invest in the tooling to make these boat more approachable for the general market.


It is time for you to start misunderstanding me: I do not advocate anything except reality. I do personally not want for me a beamy boat based on an open design and I would prefer a lighter and sportier version of Bob's boat to a boat like the Sense 46 but that is just me that don't want to cross oceans, don't sail most of the time on trade winds, sail in a places were upwind sailing is very frequent and even like to beat upwind.

If you look to the boat I own you will see that it is not one of those based on Open hulls and has a moderate beam by modern standards.

I am not the type of guy that thinks that my boat or their design parameters are the more indicated to everyone

Everything I have said regarding the Sense 46, beamy boats and why they are the right choice for most sailors is true. Benetau is not the leader on boat market by accident and went, as other brands, for a design that covered the needs of the biggest possible number of sailors. There are on the market narrower cruisers and that is not by accident that most sailors buy that kind of beamy boats but because they know that they are the most suited for their type of sailing. It is not also by accident that Dufour, Bavaria and Hanse followed that trend but for covering the needs of the vast majority of sailors.

Go back and read what I have said about the Sense 46, it is all true, the disadvantages and the advantages. It is up to you to know if it is the right boat for you or not. It is the right boat for most. Not for me and again I di not advocate anything.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

bobperry said:


> " didn't just pull the 45 degree figure out of my ***. "
> 
> Oh, good. I take it this is a contest and we have to figure out what a "***" is.
> 
> ...


No, you did not win the contest. Read the above post

In fact some 10 back I was very interested in this boat, a 51ft very narrow boat. I give up the idea because the marina costs for a 51ft boat, even if it has the interior space of a beamy 40ft, are hugely bigger. But still find it a great boat and one that, apart financial constraints, one I would like to have if a bit more modern in overall design. I love the concept.





In fact in my thread you will find all types of boats, narrow and beamy and all have their relative advantages. It turns out that beamy boats based on Open beamy hulls is the type of boat more cruisers want, not by one but by several factors. It is not me that says that but it is what the market shows. The main boat builders are not making that type of boats on account of their personal taste but to gave to the biggest number of cruisers the boat more addapted to their sailing program. That is what sells boats and make a shipyard's success.

I know well the advantages of narrow boats over beamy boats and vice verse.

Your designs are made by command and to very particular types of boat owners and for many years you have not designed a boat suited for the same market that the Sense 46 is intended: the vast majority of cruisers.

That is in fact is a huge challenge:

Not only the boat has to be not expensive in its design regarding building, has have to have a great interior space for its size, has to sail very well specially on the conditions most sailors use the boat (not beating against the wind), it has to be a very easy boat to sail and a boat made to be solo sailed. Finally you have to be successful in what regards the competition of a huge number of yacht designers that are trying to do the same, a sailing boat that suits the biggest number of cruisers.

That is what Bruce Farr has done when he designed the Bavaria vision 46, a boat based on an open racer hull concept. I would very much liked to see what would be your take regarding a similar program: A 46ft suited for the biggest number of sailors.



The same with Berret Racoupeau regarding the Sense 46:



Or Judel/Vrolijk regarding this Hanse, as all the others, based on Open boat hull concept:



Again, it is not a concept that is personally suited for me or my sailing program but then I now that I have not a program similar or sailing tastes similar to the majority of cruisers. That does not mean I am blind and unable to understand that what I find fit for me is not what is fit for the vast majority of cruisers and that is for those that mass market builders (and their designers) are making boats.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## 34crealock (Dec 30, 2012)

Call me old fashioned but I like a boat that when I look at it on it's mooring I think it is the loveliest boat in the harbor. I like a boat I stare lovingly at as I row away from it. I can't get excited by an ugly bleach bottle that holds a ton of stuff and sails 2 knots faster. I am not in a hurry. A boat is like a woman's purse or a mans garage, no matter the size you fill it up. Just my thoughts, I could be wrong, but I am glad that some folks still design beautiful boats. It is an art.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

34- as the proud prior owner of a 34PSC just love the way you said it. What some refer to as the dinghy factor. Still Paulo makes a good point. Still, its a shame the efficiencies of scale the big productions builders have cannot be applied to the various niche markets.


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

ShoalFinder said:


> Sigrid Storråda, a sailing replica off the Viking Longship Gokstad
> 
> (Captain Jack had one too many http:// I know it's obvious, but anyone who doesn't try very hard would think that link he posted was broken)
> 
> That is a really cool site. Thank you for sharing that one! (I did have some trouble with the menus which kept taking me to what appears to be a Norwegian adserver site.)


so that was the problem. thanks. it is a cool site. that adserver site didn't pop up a year ago.


----------



## Jaramaz (Aug 9, 2013)

> have to correct a few issues, there. migration age northern eurpoean history/culture/religion/and technology is my specialty.


This was stated by Captain Jack who then stated



> viking ships came in a few shapes. the main two are long ships and knorr.


No, no and no. Not Knorr, but Knarr.

The name Knarr has been used for some more modern boats










lovely boat to sail, btw. (but not to live in ...).

/J


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

outbound said:


> Paulo- I continue to find it interesting that you advocate for the current design trend for beamy boats with beam brought aft and twin rudders these boats require. I note the beautiful and very functional boats Bob posts on this forum are either extremely narrow like his Sliver design or of modest beam like the PSC ketch or more recent one off sloop.
> I know "gentlemen don't go to weather" but find I hate engine noise so frequently do go to weather. I know you have an iron stomach but find I and my crew enjoy a gentle ride allowing some fancy cooking underway and nice peaceful sleep. I know weight is the enemy of speed but find with each passage or trip to the chandlery or tool store my boat ends up with more "stuff". I realize the mass production boats meet the needs of the average sailor and "money talks BS walks" so the good cruising sea boat is increasingly a niche market. Still, that market exists and for production/semi production runs is being filled by HR, Outbound, Morris and the like. The original poster is way off base in some of his opinions in my opinion but he is correct that given the current market boats that utilize advances in naval architecture and construction but still have the blessing of being moderate in all features but are at a reasonable price point are increasingly rare. I realize this is because the solid construction and durability of these boats doesn't come cheap. Still, given this market continues to be durable in hard and good economic times it is a shame one of the big production houses does invest in the tooling to make these boat more approachable for the general market.


that's a thought that fits right in with the 'future of sailing' thread.


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

Jaramaz said:


> This was stated by Captain Jack who then stated
> 
> No, no and no. Not Knorr, but Knarr.
> 
> ...


actually, i have seen the word spelled both ways. at least for the original viking vessels, neither is exactly right. the vowel that is in the word doesn't exist in english. it is an "o" with a double dot over it ( an umlaut ) it. you see the same thing in the name of the Germanic God Frey. in english sources, it is spelled Frey and pronounced [Fr-long A sound]. in actuality, if it was spelled Frey, it would sound like [Fry]. however, it is not spelled Frey. it is spelled Fr and then an "o" with a diagonal line through it. which matches the old high German spelling of Fro. and that makes sense. however, that exact letter doesn't exist in english so translators do the best they can.


----------



## duchess of montrose (Nov 26, 2011)

He might want to check out a rustler 36, that is a nice boat its hullform is like a big modern folkboat, its what i would own if i had the money but I will stick to my contest for now speaking of which contests 45 footer is really nice although it costs over half a million dollars which is about 465 000 over my budget.Contest Yachts | 45CS


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

duchess of montrose said:


> He might want to check out a rustler 36, that is a nice boat its hullform is like a big modern folkboat, its what i would own if i had the money but I will stick to my contest for now speaking of which contests 45 footer is really nice although it costs over half a million dollars which is about 465 000 over my budget.Contest Yachts | 45CS


rustler has some nice looking boats. the 24 is really beautiful.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

"I do not advocate anything except reality.'

That is never going to work Paulo. There are far too many versions of reality. Reality is fluid. Wet birds never fly at night.


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

bobperry said:


> "I do not advocate anything except reality.'
> 
> That is never going to work Paulo. There are far too many versions of reality. Reality is fluid. Wet birds never fly at night.


actually, batman, there is no reality, just our perception of reality. all mater is just energy vibrating at a slower rate. death is just another part of existance. and there are no endings or beginnings; just spiraling continuous cycles.


----------



## duchess of montrose (Nov 26, 2011)

reality is an illusion, because reality is in essence only the product of the perceptions of the mind. For example what would you're perception of reality be if you had been raised in a third world country away from any technology or news, that world view would be real to you. 

Now on the other side of the issue what is your reality now, is that really an accurate picture of all the collective experiences of all of the creatures that roam the earth? No, it can't be, it is simply an illusion that is created by previous experiences interacting with your current environment. There is no reality, only a collection of perceptions which are falsely believed to be the fabric of existence.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

C'mon you guys.... Get real!


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

bobperry said:


> "I do not advocate anything except reality.'
> 
> That is never going to work Paulo. There are far too many versions of reality. Reality is fluid. Wet birds never fly at night.


It seems you are a Poet too

For reality I mean verifiable things. I wanted to mean that I am not advocating nothing not any particular type of hull and that each type of sailboat has its advantages and disadvantages regarding sailing and interior space.

That is the reality I was talking about and also the reality that the sailboat market shows: Sail market gives response to the needs and wants of cruisers and racers and produces what they want.

Inside the market has special importance what is called main market and that has as object the type of cruiser most cruisers want. Not necessarily the best sailingboat but the ones that represents the best buck for the money, regarding what they offer. They are known in Europe by the denomination of "family cruisers" by opposition to "luxury cruisers" and "performance cruisers".

It is on this main market that we find the biggest boat builders and they are all making very similar boats in what regards hull design. The reason they are making sailboats using the same type of hull has nothing to do with some kind of conspiracy (they are designed by many different NA) but with the fact that the solution found seems to be the one that in this moment responds better to the needs of the majority of cruisers: the best bang for the buck in what regards interior space, easiness of sailing, performance and comfort.

Again, I am not on that core that constitutes "the majority of sailors". I am on one of the minorities, the ones that prefer performance sailboats and there the solutions that correspond to what cruisers and racers want are much more diversified in what regards type of hull. You have also very beamy hulls based on solo open boats but they are not, as on the main market, a very dominant hull typology.

That's what I am talking about when I am talking about reality

Regards

Paulo


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

Classic30 said:


> Good point, but I must admit being rather surprised how well square-riggers (well, one tall ship in particular) could sail "upwind". It was more like a close reach, but with the long keel giving a good grip on the water and the square-sail clewed down hard with the right shape and at the right angle, IIRC around 60-65 degrees was possible.


Yes, but you are speaking of "modern" square-riggers boats from the XIX century, much more complex than a very basic IX or X century square rigger. The levell of performance and complexity is the same that separates any other machine from those times. He are talking about 900 years of sail evolution.

In fact I do not believe that any boat from the X century could make 60º to the wind. That is a performance of a XV century Caravela an evolution regarding Arab boats, the best and fastest sailboats of the middle ages and the ones with a better pointing ability. The Caravela had a latin rig and that allowed what was an incredible pointing angle on those days. It was needed more 400 years of sailing evolution for that upwind performance to be matched by square-riggers.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

captain jack said:


> and you know the sails used in the 9th century, sails which we have never found an example of, because you are psychic or maybe have a time machine?
> 
> give me a bit. i can use the link in my favorites to access the site but i can't get a different link than the one i posted.


Jack, I do believe that you are making this kind of statement, comparing the sailing performance of a Viking ship with the one of a modern sailing boat, in good faith but that shows that even if you have an amateur interest in this mater you are obviously not an historian.

Regarding the replica that you talk about the "research" work that lead to the development of the rig they used on that long boat hull was this:

" When we rigged Sigrid Storråda *we let our toughs free*.... *If the Vikings built a perfect hull, you can be sure they had a perfect sail to*. *There are pictures that show how they were made*. You find theme at old coins an rune stones and in every picture the sail is almost as wide as the ship is long and the height is about 1/3 of the with. Now you think that it would be difficult to beat up against the wind and go high up in the wind, and that would be true if you kept the sail horizontal all the time....

If you leaning the sail by pulling the rope in the end of the yard, or boom, things starts to happen. Now we can go 45 degrees up against the wind and the speed will be 5 knots when the wind blows by 8 m/sec. Just like any modern ship."

Any historian or any person familiar with history methodology can only take that with a big smile and not take that as a serious reconstitution.

For the rig the methodology of reconstitution was this:

*"we let our toughs free...Vikings built a perfect hull, you can be sure they had a perfect sail too"*

So lets use what we know today to design the perfect sail.

Then they say this:

*"There are pictures that show how they were made. You find theme at old coins an rune stones and in every picture the sail is almost as wide as the ship is long and the height is about 1/3 of the with. Now you think that it would be difficult to beat up against the wind and go high up in the wind, and that would be true if you kept the sail horizontal all the time."*

That is basically what I have been saying but even if that there is not a single old image that shows a Viking boat with a tilted sail and the kind of rigging they studied and applied, but plenty of them showing a plain and simple square rig, they took the liberty of thinking that would not matter because if *"Vikings built a perfect hull, you can be sure they had a perfect sail too*"

They completed disregard that nothing supports their " free thought" about the rigging they invented regarding Viking ships as they disregard also the mysterious disappearance of that rig on the generations of posterior boats and ships, while the tradition of the Viking type of hull went through the story in many versions till our days.

That as methodology to a reconstitution is hilarious and makes no sense at all.





Regarding that amazing sail performance and pointing ability for a a sailboat without a deep keel or a centerboard even with that modern rigging configuration, I find hard, if not impossible, to believe that such a boat could point to 45º but if even so it would be at a cost of a big leeway and certainly they are not using what Viking boats used for sails :hand woven from wool or linen but modern canvas or even dracon (not a word about that on the description).

Only that, I mean the use of hand woven linen instead of modern canvas, would be responsibly for much more baggy sails and a big loss on pointing ability.

So my friend, let's agree that the Viking's boat were an amazing feet of nautical design for a boat with more than 1000 years but let's agree that saying that one of those boats had a sailing performance comparable to the one of a modern sailboat is ridiculous, specially if we talk about upwind performance.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

PCP said:


> Jack, I do believe that you are making this kind of statement, comparing the sailing performance of a Viking ship with the one of a modern sailing boat, in good faith but that shows that even if you have an amateur interest in this mater you are obviously not an historian.
> 
> Regarding the replica that you talk about the "research" work that lead to the development of the rig they used on that long boat hull was this:
> 
> ...


i won't argue the point further, except to point out a few last things. a shallow keel ( in other words, not as developed as on the viking vessels ) replica of the sutton hoo ship did 60 degrees to the wind, with a regular rectangular sail. they purposely chose to make the vessel with a shallower keel because the remains of the ship give no clue to the actual depth of the keel.

also, they say they did not restrict their thoughts to what came before and, instead, they used the viking's depictions of their *own* sails to flesh out the sail. they did not say, as you try to insinuate, that they just threw archaeology and history to the wind and came up with the best sail they could concoct. you say this process for experimental archaeology is rediculous and laughable but you accept the 'standard' popularly acepted square sail which was adopted with no evidence, at all... an 1800s square sail from a tall ship was put on a replica of the gokstad ship. and you are willing to accept that as historically accurate but not a sail design supported by viking art. and, if you look at the viking art, on runestones and coins and carvings, you will note a sail that is of the form and proportions that they use, not one like you usually see on most reproductions.

by the way, the 'viking art' that you chose to post to illustrate your point isn't viking. it's norman. and it doesn't have the quality of most viking art. most viking depictions show the sail clearly. that tapestry is showing vessels running before the wind and attempts to show fore shortening which makes it a poor representation, given the nature of representative art in the early middle ages. viking art does not usually depict images of ships sailing. it shows the ship and the full view of the sail. so, you can't say that they didn't tilt the yard ( like on a dipping lug sail, really) as there is no depiction to show that, either way. however, i certainly don't think tilting the yard is that great a leap. it's less of a leap than assuming they had square sails because a replica, in the 1800s, had an 1800 era square sail mounted to it.

perhaps the issue is, you can't accept that technology isn't, and never has been, a steady direct march from caveman to now...despite the real historc evidence that shows just that.

for so many people, the idea that the ancients may have been more advanced, than we think, is a blasphemy. and your heated reaction to my original statement indicates that sentiment, only addressing the date and not the actual evidence. but i must remind you, although we are the smartest and most technological humans ever ( in our own egos ) we can not produce the pyramids, with our present technology. we can also not reproduce the crystal skulls, with our technology. until a few decades ago, we could not create steel of the quality that the anglo-saxon swordsmiths produced. during the 'dark ages' much of Roman technology was lost, only to be relearned and advanced apon. technology advances, falls back, and advances again. we still do not have more than a glimpse of most of the civilizations that have come before us.

for some, it's just too much to think that vikings might have had sails like depicted *in their own art *and that their efficient hulls might have combined with those sails to produce an excellent sailing vessel, that was ( and still is ) incredibly seaworthy. it's too much to think that sailing technology might have taken a step backwards ( in performance ) and had to be relearned. it's just too much of an affront to what we *think* we know, despite the fact that archaeology is constantly redefining what we know of the past. until the actual settlement was found, historians swore the part, in the sagas, about the vikings finding America, was BS. so much for historians always being right. i could lis a number of other areas, not related to sailing, where the historian view of the migration age was wrong, as well.

but i will let the matter rest since there is no physical evidence, beyond viking art, to support ANY type of sail that might have been used on the viking vessels. all we have is their, very real, seafaring achievements.


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

one note about sails. you imply that the lateen rig was the first efficient windward rig used and that four sided sails didn't develop efficient windward forms til very late. i would like to point out that the sprit sail appears in greco-roman art as early as the 2nd century BC. i don't know how much experience you have with spritsails. most people, if they have any, only have optimist experience and the optimist sprit sail is set up with too short a sprit which really hurts the ability to maintain proper peak tension. anyhow, i have sailed lateen sails and i have a lot of experience sailing a sprit sail. sprit sails are better to wind than lateen sails if set up properly, and the equal of lateens if set up poorly. i'd choose a sprit sail any day of the week over a lateen.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Nothing goes to weather like 40 Vikings on oars.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

captain jack said:


> ...
> by the way, the 'viking art' that you chose to post to illustrate your point isn't viking. it's norman. ..


The boats represented on the bayeux tapestry a major work of art made on the 1070s are viking boats. The tapestry represents the battle of Hastings fought in 1066 between the Norman-French army of Duke William II of Normandy and an English army under the Anglo-Saxon King Harold II, during the Norman conquest of England.

Those boats were Normand boats from Normandy and were invading England.

Normandy (today a part of France) was Viking land, have been conquered 30 to 50 years before to the Celts by the Vikings. Normands (Nortmanni in the Medieval Latin ) means "men of the North". They were Vikings (that is a generic term) living in Normandy and used Viking boats. I have posted that image because you have said previously :



captain jack said:


> ...
> however, there is no historical evidence that the vikings used tall square sails. none.
> .... in viking art, they do not show ships with tall, narrow square sails. they show them with a much different sail; one that is trapezoidal, with the head wider than the foot, and is three times as wide as it is high ( almost as wide as the ship is long ). ..




This representation of a Viking boat is especially important because it was made by the best artists of their time and it is to be expected that their representation is the best in accuracy. What they have represented looks clearly a basic square sail, one that it is not particularly long, in fact it is consistent with this modern representation.





captain jack said:


> ...
> by the way, the 'viking art' that you chose to post ...doesn't have the quality of most viking art. most viking depictions show the sail clearly. ...


I am very curious about the quality of Viking art and those depictions of a viking sail with a superior quality. I manifest my ignorance and even if history of art is not strange to me I never heard about that superior quality . That image was taken from the The Bayeux Tapestry:

*"The Bayeux tapestry is one of the supreme achievements of the Norman Romanesque, ... Its survival almost intact over nine centuries is little short of miraculous, ... Its exceptional length, the harmony and freshness of its colors, its exquisite workmanship, and the genius of its guiding spirit combine to make it endlessly fascinating"*






I had the pleasure of looking at the original and it is a magnificent work of art classified by the unesco as world heritage. I will certainly be glad to improve my knowledge on Romanesque art with those unknown (to me) Viking masterpieces depicting Viking sailboats. For sure if they have a quality of drawing superior to the one of the masterpieces of the Romanesque art they should be widely known and represented. *Please post some images of them*. I searched but I cannot find them.

For the ones that don't know it have a look at the Bayeux tapestry:







captain jack said:


> one note about sails. you imply that the lateen rig was the first efficient windward rig used and that four sided sails didn't develop efficient windward forms til very late. i would like to point out that the sprit sail appears in greco-roman art as early as the 2nd century BC. i don't know how much experience you have with spritsails. most people, if they have any, only have optimist experience and the optimist sprit sail is set up with too short a sprit which really hurts the ability to maintain proper peak tension. anyhow, i have sailed lateen sails and i have a lot of experience sailing a sprit sail. sprit sails are better to wind than lateen sails if set up properly, and the equal of lateens if set up poorly. i'd choose a sprit sail any day of the week over a lateen.


Both the latin rig and the sprit sails were Greco Latin inventions. The sprit sail was invented first and the first evidence known points to 2nd century AD:



The first unequivocal representation of a triangular latin sail appears appears in the 4th-century AD (600 years later) even if some point to an earlier date.

After that date all types of rigs were quickly substituted on the Mediterranean by the more efficient latin rig. With the ascension of the Arab power and culture further development was introduced on the latin rig. The Arabs were great sailors and had a commercial empire that stretched from the Atlantic coast of Portugal to India.

The Portuguese XIV century Caravela is a further development on boat hull and latin rig over the Arab Dhow. The Ship was able to make 60º to the wind and was an indispensable instrument in the age of discoveries. It was the best boat of its epoch in what regards versatility and pointing ability.



Caravel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That was pretty much what I had said, even if not so developed.

Edit: after having searched on my books and on available information about XV century sailboats, namely the Caravela, and different typs of rigs I can give some more accurate information based on the report of sailors of that time: the Caravela with latin sails could go against the wind at best at 56º. The same boat with square sails could make at best 68º. On both cases on such deep angles it would to be expected (as in all sailboats without a deep keel) a big leeway, that would be in the order of 10 to 15º. For that reason they avoided to sail very close to the wind.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

bobperry said:


> Nothing goes to weather like 40 Vikings on oars.


No, this Greek one points as well (on oars) but it is way faster:






Of course a quinquereme is even faster. I would like to see a replica of one of those. If this one with three rows was already difficult imagine one with 5 rows of remes (oars). They had 300 men at the oars....but that is nothing compared with a Tessarakontere. That means 40 and probably was the biggest men powered boat ever built. It had four hundred sailors, just for the sails, and four thousand rowers. It was a warship and it carried more three thousand soldiers.

Well, it seems that regarding this one they went too far and the ship was difficult to move

And since we are talking about warships, enjoy a favorite documentary among what was the more important naval battle with rowing boats: Salamina. If the winners were not the Greeks today's world would be very different.






regards

Paulo


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

about the ship art of the bayeux tapestry, it should be noted that the tapestry is an example of early medieval representational art. it was an early attempt at 'realistic'' art, which includes foreshadowing. the quality of such art, at the time, was very poor. much like MS I.33, which often shows hands on backwards, the art of the tapestry shows a lack of understanding of the techniques that show perspective. if you look at the art that you posted, you will note that it is supposed to depict ships running before the wind, which 'shortens' the appearance of the width of the yard because of perspective. thus, if viewed straight on, the yard would appear longer.

secondly, look at the sail, it was this very art that made some speculate that the vikings may have used lateen sails because the artist's attempts to depict perspective in the sail ( seen from the edge of the sail ) reduces the foot of the sail to nearly a point, making it look as if it might be some sort of a three sided sail. furthermore, if you wish to use this art as a realistic indicator of dimensional proportions, the sail, itself must have hung down a few yards below the water line, when there was no wind in it. look how long it is, like a bridal train. this is about the worst period representation of viking ships that you could have found. it is totally unreliable as a gauge of proportions.

now, compare this actual viking age art.






watching that video, it is interesting to note that the sailing qualities demonstrated by these boats is not at all primitive or crude.

this next video shows the beitas, up close, and shows how the vessel was tacked. you get a really good view of the sail shape. the sail, on this boat, was woven using techniques evident from sail fragments that have been found. it still has the tall, narrow shape because only fragments of sail have been found; nothing to indicate actual shape. good informational video. pay attention to the steering oar. i will mention that later.

http://www.provector.dk/showsingle.asp?epid=14066&iid=12 i apologize for the link instead of the video. despite my best attempts, i can't get this video to post like the others. it's worth the effort, to watch, though.

this next video shows, again, the beitas and the control over sail shape that was achieved using viking age methods, even with the tall, square sail. at one point, while it is sailing, you can clearly see the flag, which is blowing in the apparent wind. it is obvious that it is sailing close hauled and not on a reach.






this last video clearly shows the ship sailing close hauled. at 4:22, look at the wind vane on the prow. it is clearly indicating that the boat is not on a reach, but is close hauled.






now, compare the angle of sail trim to a 'modern' square rigger.






at 1:00 in the video, you see the ship sailing 'close hauled'. note that the square sails are not trimmed in nearly as tight as on the viking ships, showing that the vessel is not pointing as high. it can't because the sail shape is not as controlled as on the norse ships, which also have hulls that are far more efficient, on the wind.

finally, the under water 'foils'. it should be noted that the viking keel is not straight from stem to stern, as many think. it is deeper in the middle and is shallower at the ends, to help in turning.

also, although they knew nothing about lift, they carved their steering oars in a foil shape. what's more, they understood enough to know that the steering oar being off center would effect the handling, so the foil shape, of the 'rudder' is asymmetrical, to account for this.

the viking ships were far more sophisticated than most people believe, and had/have far greater performance than modern sailors will be comfortable to admit. already, replicas have circumnavigated the globe numerous times and the seafaring accomplishments of the vikings wouldn't be equaled for a few hundred years. the first european born on this continent was Norwegian, hundreds of years before columbus set sail.

if you look on any sailing blog, you will see someone who wants to bash the sailing qualities of these boats. i have seen it a lot; not just in this thread. it must be remembered that much of what the general public 'knows' about the people and technology from these earlier times is wrong; little more than urban myth, much like the idea that vikings wore horned helmets and crude animal furs or the idea that their swords were heavy, poor quality bashing weapons.

if you mention the weatherly quallities of viking age vessels, you often get jokes about '40 vikings rowing up wind'. however, viking war ships, which often had 80 men or more, didn't use their oars due to lack of windward ability. they used them for stealth. a big sail is very visible when you are doing a quick surprise raid. during such activities, the sail and mast would be lowered and they would row in to shore. in comparison, the knarrs/knorrs that were the work horses of the viking age, boats that were used to cross oceans, had only 4 oars even though these were not small vessels. they didn't row up wind. they sailed up wind. the oars were only for moving around the dock. such vessels were lightly manned and had no use for stealth, so they didn't need a lot of oars.


----------



## ScottUK (Aug 16, 2009)

I find your analysis of Viking design interesting C. Jack. I would be wary of extrapolating too much from Viking ship burials. They could of been built with the sole intention of the ritual (a form of ritual that dates to the Iron Age) so might not have the attributes of working ships. I would also be somewhat wary of the comparison to the tapestry, as Paulo pointed out, the ships were Norman, the conquest by Rollo took place over 150 years previously and they were thought to be quickly assimilated into the local culture. 

What you point out as the crude design of the tapestry could actually have symbolic meaning we know nothing about. The intention of the tapestry was to illustrate a story to the illiterate masses like the stain glass found in churches later. 

The 'Dark Ages' might not be as dark as you mention. Viking runic inscriptions are a derivative of Latin text. The Viking Age ring forts found in Denmark used a measurement system derived from the Romans. The danevirke could be a variant of Hadrian's/Antonine walls. The motte and bailey system used by the Normans during the conquest appears to be a form of a Roman marching camp. So I think the Dark Age is a misnomer due to the production of goods was greatly curtailed due to the general lack of a large centralised government (Rome). 

Given your interest I would suggest you visit Roskilde where they found Viking Age ships used to block up a portion of the Fjord and now are in a museum. They also have a large shop building replica ships using the tools of the time.


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

ScottUK said:


> I find your analysis of Viking design interesting C. Jack. I would be wary of extrapolating too much from Viking ship burials. They could of been built with the sole intention of the ritual (a form of ritual that dates to the Iron Age) so might not have the attributes of working ships. I would also be somewhat wary of the comparison to the tapestry, as Paulo pointed out, the ships were Norman, the conquest by Rollo took place over 150 years previously and they were thought to be quickly assimilated into the local culture.
> 
> What you point out as the crude design of the tapestry could actually have symbolic meaning we know nothing about. The intention of the tapestry was to illustrate a story to the illiterate masses like the stain glass found in churches later.
> 
> ...


man, would i absolutely loe to get the chance to do that! if i do get the chance, you can believe i will. that's for sure. the ship meseaum in Norway, as well. it's interresting you mention the vessels sunk near there. Ottar, from one of the videos, is a replica of Skuldelev1. anyhow, that would be the trip of a lifetime, for me.


----------



## ScottUK (Aug 16, 2009)

Yeah the Viking Ship Muesum is good too because because one of the ships was a burial so it includes most of the grave goods and is fairly intact. At least the Oseberg ship is. There is a good folk muesum nearby and they relocated a lot of older building from around the country near the muesum including a stave kirk.

You mentioned the Sutton Hoo ship burial though as I recall the only remnants of the boat were discoloured soil and the nails outlining the approximate form. The collection from the excavation is located at the BM in London and is not to be missed.

Kenneth Clark did a series on art for the BBC years ago and as I recall he spoke about the Viking ships near Oslo. Here is a link to the episode. You might want to give the entire series a go.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

captain jack said:


> ....
> 
> note that, in the following video, depicting smaller versions of longships being tested for the qualities of various hull and sail variations, that the yards are all, to some extent, angled down in the front, much like a dipping lug, when sailing to wind. we know that lug sails can sail efficiently to wind. notice the tight luff on these sails; nothing like the loose luffs you often see in the tall ships of later periods. the way the vikings set their sails, including the use of the beitas, gave them much better control over sail shape.
> 
> ...


No, you only hear that kind of jokes about an extraordinary wind pointing ability with oars, at least coming from a NA that knows rigs hulls and sails, when you say that a Viking boat with a rig like the ones that you have showed and with baggy linen hand made sails could make 45º to the wind without having such a leeway that would make that angle pointless. We are talking about a useful sailing angle.

If you have a good eye you can see that none of the boats you posted is making 45º to the wind, not even close. I would say 60º or more and they have modern canvas sails, not hand made cloth sails.

Nobody is bashing Vinking boats that were a big achievement for its time particularly in what regards seaworthiness and hull design. It is you that are justifying all types of jokes when keep saying that a Viking boat has the same pointing ability of a modern yacht, with a modern rig since 45º to the wind is the typical performance of a modern cruising sailboat.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

ScottUK said:


> Yeah the Viking Ship Muesum is good too because because one of the ships was a burial so it includes most of the grave goods and is fairly intact. At least the Oseberg ship is. There is a good folk muesum nearby and they relocated a lot of older building from around the country near the muesum including a stave kirk.
> 
> You mentioned the Sutton Hoo ship burial though as I recall the only remnants of the boat were discoloured soil and the nails outlining the approximate form. The collection from the excavation is located at the BM in London and is not to be missed.
> 
> ...


thanks for posting the video. definately of interest. you are right about sutton hoo. the soil, at the site, had eaten all of the wood. they wre able to lift the lines of the vessel but the actual depth of the keel remains a mystery. was it as deep as a viking ship or was it just deep enough to be the back bone of the vessel? they can't tell. that's why, when they did a reconstruction ( the sae wylfing ), they opted for just deep enough to be the back bone. they didn't want to jump to conclusions. it still saileds to, i believe, 60 degrees to the wind. been a while since i read about that reconstruction. tey used a sail like waas commonly useds in Roman areas, having no actual sail tro go by. it would be awesome if another, better preserved, anglo-saxon vessel would be found. it wouldn't have to be as rich a find as sutton hoo if the ship was in a better state of preservation. perhaps some day. they discover more, around te world, to advance our knowledge of the past, every year. you just never know what they might find.


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

PCP said:


> No, you only hear that kind of jokes about an extraordinary wind pointing ability with oars, at least coming from a NA that knows rigs hulls and sails, when you say that a Viking boat with a rig like the ones that you have showed and with baggy linen hand made sails could make 45º to the wind without having such a leeway that would make that angle pointless. We are talking about a useful sailing angle.
> 
> If you have a good eye you can see that none of the boats you posted is making 45º to the wind, not even close. I would say 60º or more and they have modern canvas sails, not hand made cloth sails.
> 
> ...


not linen. actually, the fragments they have found were wool. tightly woven and 'greased' with animal fat, colored with ochre. Ottar originally sailed with woolen sails constructed like the fragments. they were very expensive to make so their replacements were not made that way. however, they discovered that the ochre tightened the weave dramatically and the grease helped to water proof the sail as well as make it more windbreaker-like, in quality. been sailing, all day, and it's chilly out ( 40 degrees as a high ). brain isn't working enough to come up with the words to explain that better. hopefully you get what i mean. anyhow, if you watched the video, you'd notice that Ottar's sail was not baggier than any of the other sails, despite it's hand woven nature. it took as good a shape as the others.

but i've no wish to argue the point. i think the evidence of the reconstructions speak of a better performance than you will allow was possible, especially the sigrid storrada. however, until an intact sail is uncovered and an accurate reconstruction of a real viking sail is made, and tested, the point will remain as conjecture...

much the same as with the sutton hoo ship. sae wylfing is a great reconstruction and is a valuable piece of experimental archaeology, however, until an intact hull, showing the actual keel, is found, it is impossible to say what kind of performance anglo-saxon vessels were capable of, with real certainty. too much remains unknown.

but understanding is advancing. previously, historians believed that the anglo-saxons did not have sail power. on study by people familiar with sailing and longships, however, the fact that the vessel was braced for a steering oar showed that it must have been sailed as none of the smaller, oar only, vessels were designed for a steering board.

there are ground breaking new discoveries, every once in a while, that really open our eyes. at one time, historians claimed that the saga tale of finding north america was just a legend....until they found the remains of the settlement.

it's kind of useless to argue on the basis of certainty, rather than just possibility, with so much yet unknown.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

captain jack said:


> ... at one time, historians claimed that the saga tale of finding north america was just a legend....until they found the remains of the settlement.
> ...


You have a point there even if after having read Eric's Saga (parts of it) I had no doubt they had been in America, long before those settlements were discovered. It happens the same regarding the northwest passage that was made by a Portuguese pilot 200 years before the "official date" and even if that is documented even more precisely than the discovery of America by Eric, in what concerns the Saga, historians keep doubting it

Regards

Paulo


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

PCP said:


> You have a point there even if after having read Eric's Saga (parts of it) I had no doubt they had been in America, long before those settlements were discovered. It happens the same regarding the northwest passage that was made by a Portuguese pilot 200 years before the "official date" and even if that is documented even more precisely than the discovery of America by Eric, in what concerns the Saga, historians keep doubting it
> 
> Regards
> 
> Paulo


yeah. there is always stuff like that. it's kind of a flaw in 'experts'. it doesn't matter if it's historians, scientists, paleontologists, whatever experts you can name...they want to prove their theories correct. it doesn't matter what the truth is. they want to be right. they are authorities and they seem to think that means they can't admit that they might be wrong.


----------



## ScottUK (Aug 16, 2009)

> yeah. there is always stuff like that. it's kind of a flaw in 'experts'. it doesn't matter if it's historians, scientists, paleontologists, whatever experts you can name...they want to prove their theories correct. it doesn't matter what the truth is. they want to be right. they are authorities and they seem to think that means they can't admit that they might be wrong.


 That is a sweeping generalisation that in my experience is not true. As a practitioner of one of the fields you have mentioned in your posts in this thread I have rarely found this to be the case. In all of the publications I have written (there are quite a few as I am contractually required to publish my findings) and that of my colleagues the catch words appears, likely and suggests will be found. We are very aware of the limitations of the incomplete evidence we come across.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

ScottUK said:


> That is a sweeping generalisation that in my experience is not true. As a practitioner of one of the fields you have mentioned in your posts in this thread I have rarely found this to be the case. In all of the publications I have written (there are quite a few as I am contractually required to publish my findings) and that of my colleagues the catch words appears, likely and suggests will be found. We are very aware of the limitations of the incomplete evidence we come across.


Let's stay at the middle term. I believe we can say that in any science or history fields any revolutionary theory even if supported by facts is initially taken with great distrust and the ones that try to discredit it more are the leading scientists and historians that will see they work and leading position lose credibility. It has happened like this in all major revolutionary theories that proved right, from Darwin evolution of species to Einstein relativity theory.

When can also say the 90% of the revolutionary theories presented on the diverse fields proved to be wrong

Regards

Paulo


----------



## ScottUK (Aug 16, 2009)

The very notion of a theory is tempered, otherwise it would be a law. It is this reason why theories are and have been scrutinised. This is a basic foundation of the development of a science.


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

i wasn't saying it is all 'experts'. i was just saying it does happen. the more celebrity an expert achieves, the more likely he is to try to 'defend' that celebrity when the reason for it comes under fire. i'm not saying that is you, either. just that it has and does happen.


honestly, i can list a lot of things where experts have stood by their ideas despite evidence in opposition: the head on the brontosaurus/apatosaurus, gorillas, the komodo dragon, theafore mentioned discovery of Americsa by the vikings, weapon and armor usage during the migration age....

then there are the things that they just ignore because they go against accepted ideas: the crystal skulls, the nazca lines,the construction of the pyramids....

people in the lime light people often have trouble just admitting,' hey. we don't know' or ' you know, we used to think that but now we aren't so sure.'


----------



## ScottUK (Aug 16, 2009)

I didn't take your post personally C. Jack I was relating my personal experience. 

There are many instances were a particular scientific framework has been 'disproven' in light of new evidence or interpretation and then has been validated as further information has been uncovered. It is the natural evolution of scientific endeavour.


----------



## MarkSF (Feb 21, 2011)

I'll sell the OP my Bristol. Sounds like it'd be right up his street!


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

"I'll sell the OP my Bristol. Sounds like it'd be right up his street! "

Finally.
A post here I can understand.


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

MarkSF said:


> I'll sell the OP my Bristol. Sounds like it'd be right up his street!


that's the thing. there are a lot of older boats that might fit his bill. many of us long for the old days, one way or another. myself, i miss the days when they made cars that looked llike cars. but, maybe he is right. i think many industries might benefit if they offered older style products as well as more 'modern' styles. the reborn callenger certainly has done well by chrysler.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

captain jack said:


> that's the thing. there are a lot of older boats that might fit his bill. many of us long for the old days, one way or another. myself, i miss the days when they made cars that looked llike cars. but, maybe he is right. i think many industries might benefit if they offered older style products as well as more 'modern' styles. the reborn callenger certainly has done well by chrysler.


The Chrysler challenger has only an aesthetically relation with the old challenger. The mechanically parts have nothing to do with the ones on the old car and the new one has an incomparable better performance in all sectors.

It happens the same with sailboats. There are modern production sailboats that have classic or traditional looks but their underbody and rig is modern and the performance much better than the older models that served as aesthetically inspiration. There are several boats on the market with these characteristics, from traditional to classic boats.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

PCP said:


> The Chrysler challenger has only an aesthetically relation with the old challenger. The mechanically parts have nothing to do with the ones on the old car and the new one has an incomparable better performance in all sectors.
> 
> It happens the same with sailboats. There are modern production sailboats that have classic or traditional looks but their underbody and rig is modern and the performance much better than the older models that served as aesthetically inspiration. There are several boats on the market with these characteristics, from traditional to classic boats.
> 
> ...


agreed. i think that's the thing about people longing for what was. they want the things that were good about the older design but they do want the benefits of the new. and people rarely remember the faults of the old designs. like with the challenger; the mopars, of the early 70s, had problems with the electronic ignition. they started just fine, unless it was a rainy day. but no one remembers that when they look back.


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

captain jack said:


> agreed. i think that's the thing about people longing for what was. they want the things that were good about the older design but they do want the benefits of the new. and people rarely remember the faults of the old designs. ......


That's not necessarily true at all.

Believe me, there is something quite special about steering an old 'traditional' yacht made from the drawings of a designer from long ago - with all of it's faults and blemishes - because it gives a better understanding of the what the sailors of old had to deal with to achieve the remarkable feats they did.

I would refer to the people you speak of who "want good the things that were good about the older design but they do want the benefits of the new" as being the same kind of people who are prefer a replica (boat, car.. tapestry, painting) to the original. In a word: Fakes.

By example: Imagine building a "modern" Viking long-ship, with all of the "faults" (as declared by some "expert") fixed up. How stupid would that be?? I'm reminded of the story told by Uffa Fox of one replica viking ship group who decided to fit a modern rudder instead of a "steer-board".. and then found that the steer-board was easier to use and worked better, so they ditched the rudder altogether.


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

Classic30 said:


> That's not necessarily true at all.
> 
> Believe me, there is something quite special about steering an old 'traditional' yacht made from the drawings of a designer from long ago - with all of it's faults and blemishes - because it gives a better understanding of the what the sailors of old had to deal with to achieve the remarkable feats they did.
> 
> ...


very true. lol. i guess i wasn't thinking about it, that way, but i built a hardtail chopper with a right hand suicide shifter. i got rid of the starter and went kickstart only....for exactly that reason. new technology is convenient and often performs better but, a lot of times, the older ways add much more character to the experience. i should have thought of that, myself. but, in a world of guys who ride softtails because they like the hardtail but don't have what it takes to ride one...a world where there are fake kickstarters that simply engage the starter...i just didn't think about it that way. there are just more people that only want the look of the old ways than there are people who want the actual experience of it.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

Classic30 said:


> ...
> 
> Believe me, there is something quite special about steering an old 'traditional' yacht made from the drawings of a designer from long ago - with all of it's faults and blemishes - because it gives a better understanding of the what the sailors of old had to deal with to achieve the remarkable feats they did.
> 
> ....


No doubt about that, like it is a great pleasure to drive a Bugatti from the 30's and I certainly would have a much better understanding about what old sport drivers had to cope with, but would I want it (or somebody for that matter) as my personal car for cruising extensively in Europe or in the States?

Nice experience to drive one but to have it as a personal car it makes no sense if I can have a modern sports car with much better performance. Although I would love to have a Bugatti for some short rides and to go to some classic parades or even races.

With boats it is pretty much the same even if regarding the Bugatti we are talking about sailboats from the 30's and I think you are referring to less old boats, but the reasoning is the same.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

PCP said:


> No doubt about that, like it is a great pleasure to drive a Bugatti from the 30's and I certainly would have a much better understanding about what old sport drivers had to cope with, but would I want it (or somebody for that matter) as my personal car for cruising extensively in Europe or in the States?
> 
> Nice experience to drive one but to have it as a personal car it makes no sense if I can have a modern sports car with much better performance. Although I would love to have a Bugatti for some short rides and to go to some classic parades or even races.
> 
> ...


Paulo, I like your analogy and, no, I'm not really referring to less old boats.. 

When you study it, most people in the sailing world are not live-aboards and sail about as often as you'd drive the '30s Bugatti in your example above: "short rides and to go to some classic parades or even races".

Sure, if I needed to sail even my old boat as much as I drive my personal car, I'd get tired of it pretty quickly - but that's where I'd shift to something entirely modern, for all the reasons you post above.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

Classic30 said:


> ...
> Sure, if I needed to sail even my old boat as much as I drive my personal car, I'd get tired of it pretty quickly - but that's where I'd shift to something entirely modern, for all the reasons you post above.


These days I sail my boat a lot more than I drive my car. There are several types of sailboats and the fact that many have cruising boats but don't cruise in them is the reason why you have seen in Europe but also on the states a huge increase of daysailers or weekend cruisers, some with more than 50fts, that are more adapted for the real use those sailors give to them. But you are right, for shorter rides an old boat can be lots of fun, like an old beautiful car.

But a cruising boat is designed for cruising and I only cruise in mine, not Sunday sails, no weekend sails and that for a good reason, the boat is near the cruising grounds that now are in Greece. Anyway what I really like is to pick the boat and sail away. Never liked much short rides

Regards

Paulo


----------



## captain jack (May 5, 2013)

PCP said:


> These days I sail my boat a lot more than I drive my car.
> 
> Paulo


man. i wish i could set my life up so i could say that. someday...


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

PCP said:


> But a cruising boat is designed for cruising and I only cruise in mine, not Sunday sails, no weekend sails and that for a good reason, the boat is near the cruising grounds that now are in Greece. Anyway what I really like is to pick the boat and sail away. Never liked much short rides
> 
> Regards
> 
> Paulo


Greece?!?   You are a VERY fortunate man, Paulo. 



captain jack said:


> man. i wish i could set my life up so i could say that. someday...


Heh. You ain't the only one!!!


----------



## ScottUK (Aug 16, 2009)

> Greece?!? You are a VERY fortunate man, Paulo.


Does the new cruising charges in Greece deter you at all Paulo? Glad I have already ticked that box though I wouldn't mind going back.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

ScottUK said:


> Does the new cruising charges in Greece deter you at all Paulo? Glad I have already ticked that box though I wouldn't mind going back.


Thanks for pointing it to me I did not know about that:

*"If the law is imposed, the tax will be introduced on 1 January 2014, as a circulation tax and will mean yachts and motorboats between 7m and 12m will have to pay up to €400 each year......

The tax will be charged for all recreational and commercial ships and small boats, regardless of their flag, which sail, are moored or anchored in Greek waters."*
Read more at Yachts cruising in Greece face up to €400 annual tax | Pbo

If this is going through I would say that probably I will change my plans, for the money but also for a question of principle. It is a huge tax over the about 60 euros you payed already for some papers that were needed.

Do you know what is the situation in Croatia after the entering of EC? They still have that tax of about 260 euros?

Regards

Paulo


----------



## ScottUK (Aug 16, 2009)

Can't help you there Paulo. I have only sailed in Croatia on a bareboat.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

Scott, now that you have warned me I have more information: The law has already been approved in the parliament and it will be effective after 1 of January 2014. 

Regarding boats with more than 12m (that's my case) happily it is not as hard in what concerns me because it can be paid monthly: 10 euros for meter. that is quite stupid because if a boat with 11 or 12 m stays 15 days or three weeks in Greece it will pay 400 euros while a 13 meters boat will pay 130 euros

Well, it seems that it is this time that I will be sailing in Turkey. They have another stupidity there that is that law on grey and black water but because it is impossible to fulfill (and they know it) nobody, ioncluding the authorities, takes that seriously.

Anyway to sail in Greece to reach Turkey, unless I will make it direct and that's a shame, I will have to pay 125 euros to go and another 125 euros to return. Anyway less than 400 euros and about the same one pays to sail in Croatia.

This law will be very good for Croatia and Turkey and very bad for Greece. He will see lots of boats leaving Greece for those two countries.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## ScottUK (Aug 16, 2009)

Didn't Italy try something similar with negative results? I hope this is a complete failure and backfires. I also wonder of the laws compliance with EU regs. I think it is analogous to charging a tax on a EU car travelling in another EU country. Given the overall situation in Greece, I hold the ECB directly responsible.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

ScottUK said:


> Didn't Italy try something similar with negative results? I hope this is a complete failure and backfires. I also wonder of the laws compliance with EU regs. I think it is analogous to charging a tax on a EU car travelling in another EU country. Given the overall situation in Greece, I hold the ECB directly responsible.


They thought about something that for Sardinia years ago but they never went ahead with it. They have a tax on yachts but that has nothing to do with foreign boats but yes, they have considered recently something similar when they created that tax that ended up to be only for Italian boats. I have my boat in Italy and I don't pay any tax.

Croatia also charged about 260 euros for year to all foreign yachts sailing their waters, even if just for a day. I don't know how the situation is now.

I agree this is all pretty arbitrary and that EC should regulate the matter, after all one of the bases of EC is free circulation of persons. I believe that in the end they will do it but that is a long process. A complaint must be made then they have to analyze it then they will issue a mandatory "recommendation" that if not followed will have as consequence increasingly higher fines to Greece.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## austintoday (Nov 12, 2013)

Hi,
Ive read the letter and it was nice reading on your thoughts and experiences with yacht designers all over. 

Thanks,
Austin


----------

