# Decription of hull/keel types



## kwaltersmi (Aug 14, 2006)

Can someone point me in the direction of a pictorial representation of different hull/keel types (ie "shoal keel", "fin keel", "full keel", etc.)?

Thanks!


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

A full keel boat looks like:









A fin keel boat looks like:









There is no such thing as a shoal keel. A shoal keel is just a description used to describe boats of fairly shallow draft, and can be full or fin keeled.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

A. Full Keel
B. Fin Keel with attached rudder 
C. CCA era Fin Keel w/ post hung rudder
D. IOR era Fin Keel w/ Skeg hung rudder
E. Cruising shoal keel w/ skeg hung rudder
F. IMS type high aspect ratio fin w/ bulb and post hung rudder

Jeffhttp://www.cruisersforum.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=2367&c=500


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Jeff, those are not even sailboats... they do not have a mast. And where are the barnacles? I see NOOOO prop.

Honestly, Jeff, if you are going to try and maintain your reputation as a knowledgeable yachtsman, you should really study up more.

Scratch you off the 'creative artist' in my book. Not even in color.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Jeff- Are you sure that F is a bulb keel, it looks more like a wing keel.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

SD,

'F' is a Sea Ray, and they do not have keels. What's the matter with you? Did you even take the time to look at his drawings?

Now you, on the other hand, I can tell you really spent some time with the old pencil putting that together. I would have been nicer in color though.


----------



## kwaltersmi (Aug 14, 2006)

Thanks Jeff! That was _exactly_ what I was looking for. (Nice artwork too!)


----------



## captnnero (Jul 19, 2006)

*but wait, that's not all*

There's another keel design that only just came on the market about twenty years ago so maybe that's why it wasn't mentioned by some of the other posters. 

This new fangled thing is called a wing. It's also seen in combination with the bulb.


----------



## yachtsea (Aug 14, 2006)

So whats a swing keel?


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

yachtsea said:


> So whats a swing keel?


Basically a boat with a very heavily weighted centerboard.


----------



## SailorMitch (Nov 18, 2005)

*Health warning for winged keels*



captnnero said:


> There's another keel design that only just came on the market about twenty years ago so maybe that's why it wasn't mentioned by some of the other posters.
> 
> This new fangled thing is called a wing. It's also seen in combination with the bulb.


Captnnero -- In your line of work as a yach-it broker, have your attorneys advised you to place health warnings on all boats with winged keels along the lines of *IF YOU RUN AGROUND YOU SHALL SURELY DIE!!!!*

Somehow I just managed 4 days on the bay, including a run through Kent Narrows and anchoring for two nights in the skinny waters of Granary Creek off the Wye, *AND I AM ALIVE TO TELL THE TALE!!!!*

An interesting side note: one of the participants in my weekend activities showed up in his Beneteau 36.7. It draws 7'3" or some such, with what he described as a "flattened bulb" at the end of the keel. Sounds like a wing to me! He had to anchor off to one side away from everyone else because he feared going aground. Oh well.

To the person asking about this topic originally, there are endless variations to the keel designs described above by others. Keel style is only one variable in picking a boat. A good site for down to earth discussions of boat designs:

http://www.tedbrewer.com/index.html


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

what's wrong with a wing keel?


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a wing keel. Fins perform better. Wings give you larger sailing area (depth).

If you are going to be sailing in an area that is predominantly deep water, buy a fin. If you are in an area where your draw could be an issue, buy a wing.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

This is from a draft for an article I was working on and has been published here before.....(It will be in three parts because of word count limits)

First of all your question seems to be about appendages. In principle Appendages keep a boat from making leeway. They come in many shapes and sizes. Keels are supposed to be a fixed appendage and centerboards generically are moveable appendages that occur on the centerline but centerboards are just one kind of moveable appendage. In more detail:

Keels:
The earliest form of a keel was simply the backbone of the boat extending through the bottom planking. (Like a Viking ship) That works OK with running and reaching sails but when you try to point toward the wind you slip side wards at great speed. As sails and rigs were invented that allowed boats to point toward the wind the keel was extended below the boat either by planking the hull down to a deeper backbone or by adding dead wood (solid timber below the backbone. A planked down keel permitted the space between the planking to be filled with heavy material (originally stone), which served as ballast keeping the boat from heeling. After a while it was discovered that there were advantages to bolting a high-density cast metal ballast to the outside of the deadwood and interior ballast dropped out of fashion. 

Full keels:
These earliest keels pretty much ran from the point of entry at the bow, to the aft most point of exit at the stern. Those are full keels in the fullest sense of the word. 

They have some advantages; they theoretically form a long straight plane, which keeps a boat on course better (greater directional or longitudinal stability). If you run aground they spread out the load over a larger area reducing the likelihood of damage. Once really planted they keep the boat from tipping over fore and aft. They are easier to haul and work on. You can spread out the ballast over a longer distance and so they can be shallower for the same stability. You have a greater length to bolt on ballast so it is a theoretically sturdier and simpler connection. 

They have some disadvantages; a larger portion of the keel operates near the surface and near the intersection of the hull and keel, which are both turbulent zones. They also have comparatively small leading edges, and the leading edge is the primary generator of lift preventing sideslip. Because of that they need a lot more surface area to generate the same lift. Surface area equates to drag so they need more sail area to achieve the same speed. Long keels tend to be less efficient in terms of lift to drag for other reasons as well. As a boat makes leeway water slips off of the high-pressure side of the keel to the low-pressure side of the keel and creates a turbulent swirl know as a tip vortex. This is drawn behind the boat creating drag in a number of ways. The longer the keel, the bigger the vortex, the greater the drag. So they need more sail area again to overcome this drag. To stand up to this greater sail area the boat needs more ballast and a stronger structure, which is why long keelboats are often heavier, as well. (Of course, then the spiral starts again as more sail area is needed to overcome that additional weight as well. It is the classic weight breeding more weight design cycle) Full keels tend to be much less maneuverable. 


Fin keels:
By the classic definition of a fin keel any keel whose bottom is less than 50% of the length of the boat is a fin keel. Fin keels came into being in an effort to reduce drag. Cut away the forefoot or rake the stem, as well as, move the rudderpost forward and rake it sharply and pretty soon you have a fin keel. Today we assume that fin keels mean a separated rudder (skeg hung or spade) but in fact early fin keels had the rudder attached in a worst of all worlds situation. They offer all of the disadvantages of both full and fin keels, but with none of the virtues. Unknowing or unscrupulous brokers will often refer to boats with fin (or near fin) keels as full keel if they have an attached rudder.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Fin keels with separate rudders seem to be the most commonly produced keel form in the US these days. (I could be wrong, there is a resurgence of full keels these days)

Fin keels have some advantages as well. They have less drag as explained above so they typically make less leeway and go faster. You can get the ballast down lower so in theory they are more stable for their weight. They are more maneuverable. They take better advantage of the high efficiency of modern sail plans and materials.

They have some disadvantages as well, many of these have been offset or worked around by modern technology but at some level they are still accurate critiques. They have less directional stability than long keel boats so the tend to wander more under sail. Since directional stability is also a product of the dynamic balance between the sail plan and underbody, in practice they may actually hold a course as well as a full keel. In general though you can expect to make more course adjustments with a fin keel. It is sometimes argued that the lower helm loads requires less energy to make these corrections so a fin keel may also require less energy to maintain course. This I think is a product of the individual boat and could lead to a debate harder to prove than the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin. 

Fin keels are harder to engineer to withstand a hard grounding and when aground they are more likely to flop over on their bow or stern. (Although in 37 years of sailing, I have never heard of anyone actually experiencing this.) Fins typically have deeper draft. They are easier to pivot around and get off in a simple grounding. 

Shoal keel
A shoal keel is just a keel that is not as deep as a deep keel. Today the term seems to be applied mostly to shallow fin keels. Shallow full keels seem to be referred to as shoal draft boats. A shallow fin is a tough animal to classify. Like a fin keel with an attached rudder, I really think it has few of the advantages of either a deep fin or a full keel and has many of the worst traits of both full and fin. This can be partially offset by combining a shallow fin with a centerboard, which is a neat set up for shoal draft cruising.

Bulb Keel:
A lot can be done to improve a shallow fin. One way is to add a bulb. A bulb is a cast metal ballast attachment added to the bottom of the keel. They concentrate the ballast lower providing greater stability and sail carrying ability than a simple shallow keel. Traditionally bulbs were torpedo or teardrop shaped. They have been re-contoured to provide some hydrodynamic properties. Recalling the discussion on tip vortex from above. Shallow keels need to be longer horizontally than a deeper fin in order to get enough area to prevent leeway. This means that a shallow longer fin would generate more tip vortex and more drag than a deeper keel. The bulb creates a surface to turn the water aft and prevent it from slipping over the tip of the keel thereby reducing tip vortex. This does not come free since a bulb increases frontal area and surface area. 

Wing keels 
Wing keels are a specialized type of bulb keel. Instead of a torpedo shaped bulb there are small lead wings more or less perpendicular to the keel. These concentrate weight lower like a bulb and properly designed they also are very efficient in reducing tip vortex. There has been some discussion that wings increase the effective span of the keel when heeled over but this does not seem to be born out in tank testing of the short wings currently being used in production sailboats. Not all wings are created equal. They potentially offer a lot of advantages, but they are heavily dependent on the quality of the design and I really think that many wing designs are not really working to their potential. 

Then there is the whole grounding issue. In 2002, the Naval Academy did a study of keel types and grounding. They found that the popular perception that wing keels are harder to free is accurate. In their study, wing keels were extremely harder to free. Straight fins were much easier to free, especially when heeled, and the easiest keel to free was the bulb keel.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Keels that are not really keels:
Swing keels are ballasted centerboards and drop keels are ballasted daggerboards that are ballasted beyond what it takes to submerge themselves. They are really forms of centerboards. More on these in the discussion on centerboards.

Keels that are keels that move.
I said in the introduction that keels do not move. That used to be true. We now have canting keels, which can be pivoted from side to side. They are best designed to be light fins with heavy bulbs that can be canted to windward increasing the effectiveness of the righting aspects of the keel. Just one problem, a keel canted to windward losses efficiency to prevent leeway so they really need other foils to keep leeway in check. I frankly do not like the idea of a canting keel. I think canting keels are too complex and potentially problematic. 

Centerboards:
Centerboards are appendages that can be raised and lowered on or near the centerline of the boat. They can rotate up into a trunk or rotate below the boat. Daggerboards are a type of centerboard that raises vertically or near vertically in a trunk. Swing keels are a type of rotating centerboard that actually contains a substantial portion of the boat's ballast. They may be housed in a trunk like a Tartan 27 or 34 or hung below the boat like a Catalina 22. In the case of the Tartan 27 or 34 they are more frequently referred to as a Keel/ Centerboard (abbreviated k/cb). A swing keel is intended to act as a fin keel when lowered and allow some sailing in the partially raised position. My biggest problem with swing keels is that most do not have a positive lock down. In an extreme knockdown they can slam up into the hull greatly reducing the boat's stability. This is a pretty rare occurrence and usually requires big wave action combined with a lot of wind, but I have experienced it out in the Atlantic. 

A drop keel is a daggerboard that actually contains a substantial portion of the boat's ballast. These are easier to lock down but can be more easily damaged in a grounding. They generally have better shape than a swing keel and can be more robust, but not always are. 

Other appendages: (besides the rudders)
Bilge keels (or twin keels for our English friends) are a pair of keels (usually fins these days) that emerge on either side of the boat and angle out. They offer some advantages. If you let the boat dry out the boat can stand on the two keels and wait the next tide. There are dubious theories about increased efficiency since one is vertical like a good leeway resisting foil and one is canted like a good stability inducing foil. With computer modeling there has been greater success in approaching that theory on large bilge keel boats. While bilge keels do allow shallow draft though, they extremely difficult to free once aground since having the two keels on the ground prevents heeling the boat to get free. In practice bilge keels have enormous wetted surface creating a lot of drag at lower speeds, and produce two very large tip vortexes creating a lot of drag at speed. 

Keel Centerboards are a wonderful choice for coastal and offshore cruising. Properly designed they offer nearly the performance of a fin keel, and yet permit access to shallower venues. They can be partially raised to precisely control the center of lateral resistance and therefore offers the ability to have a very neutral helm and great tracking in a wide range of conditions. Properly constructed they have proven to have a long service life. Keel-centerboard boats really proved themselves offshore during the late 1950's and into 1960's.They fell out of popularity with the advent of the wing keel in the early 1980's. The downside is that they are a little harder to maintain, and because the ballast is closer to the center of buoyancy they require more ballast and so end up requiring a higher overall displacement, a higher ballast to displacement ratio, or are more tender, or some combination of the three. 

Bilge boards (for the scow guys), are a pair of centerboards that angle out of each side of the boat. They work well on scows but I've never been able to really figure out scows anyway. Seriously, You raise the windward board and lower the Leeward one on each tack and because they are close to vertical they can be small and efficient. I still don't get the scow thing.

Last but not least- Leeboards. Leeboards are foils that are bolted to the side of the hull like on Dutch Jachts and Herreshoff Meadowlarks. Phil Bolger's sharpies use them a lot as well. They have some advantages but they drive me nuts. They are vulnerable in docking and ideally are raised and lowered on each tack also. Some are raised to be hinged feather so they do not need to be raised.

So that's about it. The final is tomorrow- multiple choice and essay.

Jeff


----------



## SailorMitch (Nov 18, 2005)

*Study? What study?*



Jeff_H said:


> Wing keels
> Wing keels are a specialized type of bulb keel. Instead of a torpedo shaped bulb there are small lead wings more or less perpendicular to the keel. These concentrate weight lower like a bulb and properly designed they also are very efficient in reducing tip vortex. There has been some discussion that wings increase the effective span of the keel when heeled over but this does not seem to be born out in tank testing of the short wings currently being used in production sailboats. Not all wings are created equal. They potentially offer a lot of advantages, but they are heavily dependent on the quality of the design and I really think that many wing designs are not really working to their potential.
> 
> Then there is the whole grounding issue. In 2002, the Naval Academy did a study of keel types and grounding. They found that the popular perception that wing keels are harder to free is accurate. In their study, wing keels were extremely harder to free. Straight fins were much easier to free, especially when heeled, and the easiest keel to free was the bulb keel.


Thanks to Captnnero, the link to the naval academy study is available on the thread titled "Keel type." The study only compared fin and bulb keels -- no mention of wings, bilge keels, etc. Interestingly, the study states "Overall, there was not a big difference between the two keel shapes regarding the pull-off force necessary to free the model after it ran aground." An interesting article for those who are interested.

Also, someone else posted this link to an article by Ted Brewer, naval architect. He does a good job of demystifying boat design elements in his articles for Good Old Boat magazine. http://www.boatus.com/goodoldboat/keeldesign.htm

And we won't even get into how many bulbs in use today also incorporate wings.


----------



## captnnero (Jul 19, 2006)

*follow-up*



SailorMitch said:


> Thanks to Captnnero, the link to the naval academy study is available on the thread titled "Keel type." The study only compared fin and bulb keels -- no mention of wings, bilge keels, etc. Interestingly, the study states "Overall, there was not a big difference between the two keel shapes regarding the pull-off force necessary to free the model after it ran aground." An interesting article for those who are interested.
> 
> ...


Actually I recently corresponded with the faculty advisor who was named on that fin and "proposed" bulb grounding study from the Naval Academy done in 2001. He does not recollect any other grounding studies done, but he is asking around for me. I have not been able to otherwise find such a wing grounding study and that is why I asked the professor.

Jeff, if you can't come up with this definitive study on wing grounding, perhaps you should consider backing off in your remarks about it in your otherwise informative descriptions. If such a Naval Academy study exists lets put it on the table. I was surprised that the professor was not aware of it when I inquired so I now have my doubts about the existence of such a wing grounding study.

There is another distinction to be made here concerning the known substantiated study. The 2001 Naval Academy study does not generally say that bulb keels are the easiest to extract after a grounding. What it says is that the "proposed" bulb is eaiser to extract than the fin they used. The purpose of the study was specifically to evaluate a proposed bulb keel to be used on the next generation of the Naval Academy's sailboats.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

I first saw the paper presented at the SNAME's Small Sailing Craft Symposium. I ended up eating lunch with one of the presenters and discussing the paper. I later attended a second presentation by that fellow at the academy. In my conversations with him mentioned that one of the students who was interested in more traditional boat building methods and types also gather data on materials not covered in the report final report which you provided a link to which indeed was specifically aimed at the replacement boats. In the hull strength of materials study he tested cold molded wooden construction and it is my understanding that that student also looked a number of different keel types. Since it was not relevant to the replacement boats, this collateral data was not reported on the NA website. That said, I am reporting the information as it was reported to me. 

I will be very interested in hearing what the professor has to say about that and if someone misrepresented the extent of the reseach then I will gladly stand corrected. 

Jeff


----------



## captnnero (Jul 19, 2006)

*Sname*



Jeff_H said:


> I first saw the paper presented at the SNAME's Small Sailing Craft Symposium. I ended up eating lunch with one of the presenters and discussing the paper. I later attended a second presentation by that fellow at the academy. In my conversations with him mentioned that one of the students who was interested in more traditional boat building methods and types also gather data on materials not covered in the report final report which you provided a link to which indeed was specifically aimed at the replacement boats. In the hull strength of materials study he tested cold molded wooden construction and it is my understanding that that student also looked a number of different keel types. Since it was not relevant to the replacement boats, this collateral data was not reported on the NA website. That said, I am reporting the information as it was reported to me.
> 
> I will be very interested in hearing what the professor has to say about that and if someone misrepresented the extent of the reseach then I will gladly stand corrected.
> 
> Jeff


I did some searchs on the SNAME site for "wing" and then for "grounding" and did not find anything relevant published. I also searched a list of titles of SNAME smallcraft papers sold on a CD to no avail.

Way back when I was a computer science research assistant for a few years at University of Maryland. There it was a publish or perish mentality there so any study we did had to be at least published as a Comp Sci department Technical Report.


----------



## captnnero (Jul 19, 2006)

*Update: USNA grounding studies*

FWIW- I just heard from the professor at the Naval Academy. He couldn't find any other keel grounding work there other than that one fin/bulb limited study that he was the advisor for.

He did recommend I check CSYS, so I did. I searched their abstracts and came up empty with respect to any keel grounding work. If interested check out www.csysonline.com.

I've checked the Naval Academy, SNAME, and CSYS. Unless I hear something new I will not be doing further searching.


----------



## Gene T (May 23, 2006)

captnnero - are you obsessed with this?

My only personal experience with grounding a wing keel boat was as crew aboard a 51 foot 32,000 lb boat. I pointed out to the captain owner that he was cutting the corner inside the red marker but he quickly told me he knew this harbor entrance very well. We were motoring and went hard aground at about 5 knots. It took about 15 minutes but I had him spin the boat around 180 deg and work it back and forth. We finally managed to go out the way we came in. I have seen pictures of wing keel boats sitting on just their keels, high and dry at low tide and perfectly straight with their wings visible above the mud. But most of these modern wing keels are just thick wide bulbs. Hard to think of it as a real wing if it is 6" to 8" thick.

So I suppose it depends a lot of the density of the bottom. But most times you go aground the bottom is going to be pretty firm and it is likely you will just slide on top.


----------



## Gene T (May 23, 2006)

Now I am wonder about the effect of grounding while under sail. The boat will slow down as soon as one edge of the wing hits and likely grabs like a fin because it is at an angle. The wind will tend to push the boat sideways now causing the one wing to dig in towards front and side (like a shovel). Now what do you do? Drop sails quick and see if you can level the boat out I guess. In light winds you could just try to back-wind the sails. Just guessing but I don't think it would be easy to un-stick the boat in this situation.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

The paper in question was presented at the SNAME-CBYRA sponsored 16th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Symposium. A short while later I saw a more in depth presentation sponsored either by the Storm Trisail Club of the Chesapeake, NASS or CCA, I don't recall which. I was invited by one of the presenters who I had eaten lunch with during the CSYS.

The paper that was presented at the 16th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Symposium was called Student Research Projects for the New Navy 44 Training Craft. The lecture that I attended later on had greater detail and had a much more extensive post presentation question and answer period. I try to dig out my copy of the procedures and check my notes to give you the name of the fellow I had been talking with and perhaps page reference for the discussion on the broader grounding study.

Jeff


----------



## pigslo (Nov 22, 2004)

My theory on groundings was always to immediately lower sail and back up. The idea being that the only thing you know for sur is how deep the water is you just left. A long time sailing buddy would turn 180 and try to power out. We both had sucess with our own methods. I am sure the results always vary with the varibles of slope and compositin of the bottom as much as the keel you happen to carry.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

My theory on groundings is—pull up the centerboard, and turn around...and get outta Dodge.  Of course if I ground the hull, then I just get out and push...since the hulls on my boat only draw about 15".


----------



## captnnero (Jul 19, 2006)

*Is that a rhetorical question ?*



Gene T said:


> captnnero - are you obsessed with this?


Gene, "I know you are but what am I ?"

My personal opinions of experiences with wing and other groundings seem to differ with what some others in this forum seem to think related to grounding risks. I'm just trying to deal with the facts here.

References to a wing keel grounding study have been repeatedly posted to this forum when the subject of keels comes up. I'd like to see the study myself to judge it's relevance. I have posted information on where I looked for the so far elusive study so that others can either validate my statements or research on their own. Maybe someone will find it.



Gene T said:


> So I suppose it depends a lot of the density of the bottom. But most times you go aground the bottom is going to be pretty firm and it is likely you will just slide on top.


My experience with a wing on the muddy Chesapeake is that when heeled, you wobble from side to side instead of just sliding up as you do with a fin or bulb. With a wing I've even dropped sail, the boat leveled and immediately floated off since the wing leveled has a shallower draft than when it is heeled, unlike the fin or bulb. Grounding a motored wing is the worst case but with a steeper shoal I have had the wing not ride up as it has a wider profile striking the shelf and it is harder to penetrate, unlike a fin which will slice in.

Your mileage may vary.


----------



## captnnero (Jul 19, 2006)

*CBs*



sailingdog said:


> My theory on groundings is-pull up the centerboard, and turn around...and get outta Dodge.  Of course if I ground the hull, then I just get out and push...since the hulls on my boat only draw about 15".


I like that idea and the notion of the CB being a depth sounder.


----------



## SailorMitch (Nov 18, 2005)

*Death Defying Adventure!*

Yes, last weekend *I cheated DEATH once again on my wing keeled boat*. I dared to sail across the treacherous shoal known as Swan Point Bar *ON PURPOSE AT LOW TIDE!* At every inch of this perilous journey I stared *DEATH IN THE EYE* -- at least according to some of you. I started to call the Coast Guard just to have them prepared as I began this very foolish stunt, but I chose to risk it all alone! *And I lived to tell the tale!*

Actually, I was quite comfy with at least 10 inches of water under my keel (draws 4'2") at the shallowest point. Have cut across that bar many times without a problem. But how about this? Let's have a race with all you fin keelers against us wing keelers. We can start wherever you want -- but the finish line has to be across Swan Point Bar at low tide. That way we can have a truly fair test of the attributes of fins versus those of wings. Fair enough?


----------



## captnnero (Jul 19, 2006)

SailorMitch said:


> Yes, last weekend *I cheated DEATH once again on my wing keeled boat*. I dared to sail across the treacherous shoal known as Swan Point Bar *ON PURPOSE AT LOW TIDE!* At every inch of this perilous journey I stared *DEATH IN THE EYE* -- at least according to some of you. ...
> 
> But how about this? Let's have a race with all you fin keelers against us wing keelers. We can start wherever you want -- but the finish line has to be across Swan Point Bar at low tide. That way we can have a truly fair test of the attributes of fins versus those of wings. Fair enough?


SailorMitch, after that stunt I shall always think of you as DEATH DEFYING MITCH !  

Do count me in for your "Shoal Cup".


----------



## Rockter (Sep 11, 2006)

For me it must be long.

Long keels are where it's at, for me, at least.

Long keel for the long haul, said one. 

We don't often have to go to weather, and long keel can make reasonable progress to weather, when it has to.

But when the weather gets up, give me every ounce of that massive lead keel, and be thankful for it.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

The length of the keel has no bearing on the amount of ounces of lead in the keel or the vertical center of gravity of the boat. In fact many, if not most long keel boats have lower ballast ratios with ballast carried higher than the better modern fin keel boats. So as for me. But when the weather gets up, give me every ounce of that massive lead keel, carried lower in the water and with better dampening in a well designed fin keel and be thankful for it.

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## Rockter (Sep 11, 2006)

The deep fin will be faster and point higher but it's much more reliant on forward speed for stability there Jeff. In light airs, you'll ghost past me. 

Heave to with a fin keel there.... enjoy the difference! And when you are running before a big sea and you hear all that creaking beneath your feet, you have total confidence in them. They never break off either.

And the more frequent helm corrections with that big paddle sticking down... I remember that once.... oh, expletives galore. And watching the whole structure of the ship bending like a saw blade and the forestay bowing in sympathy. More expletives. 



Long live the long keel for the long haul!

I am convinced there is a market for them.... they must be better at something.

I am glad I bought mine.


----------



## yotphix (Aug 18, 2006)

Rockter! Tell the nice readers that fin keels don't fall off (except the canting type). It's not nice to scare people with sensational tales of horror.

On a beam reach or higher I can lash the tiller of my fin keel and go sit on the foredeck. no helm corrections necessary.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

*Grounding a wing keel*

I happen to be the happy (!?!) owner of a 1980's-vintage 42' wing keel boat.
Now I can't remember where I read it, but there was some discussion of what to do when one of these keels runs aground. Besides trying to motor out, or getting towed out by a tow boat, some enterprising souls suspended a water-filled dinghy from a point up the mast to lay the boat over to extract the grounded keel. But the most interesting comments I read were about the use of air-filled flotation bags to raise the boat off the bottom. The logic is that flotation is much gentler than brute force. It would seem to me that if one had a compressor onboard (even a small one, such as might be used for an inflatable dinghy) and a set of these bags, this might be an excellent set of safety equipment to have on hand when sailing in remote areas with poorly-charted reefs. This should enhance the ability to be self-sufficient.
Comments?
Q


----------



## yotphix (Aug 18, 2006)

Yep bags can work. We had some sucess with that on a towboat I used to run. Still, on a wing buried in sand It's tougher than you might think. Jetting the sand away with a pump can help too but it would be a pretty big boat that can afford the space and weight of a big enough pump or air bags and compressor. 

It just ocurred to me that you could use an inflatable tender as an airbag in a pinch. Maybe deflate, slide it under the bow and tie lines to midship and foredeck cleats. It would have to be prerigged with an inflation hose obviously.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

"And the more frequent helm corrections with that big paddle sticking down... "
I think that's confusing two issues. A full keel will give more directional stability than a poorly designed fin keel. But if the fin keel is placed properly (with regard to the centers of effort) and the hull is properly contoured, and the sail plan is balanced (a matter of design and operator skill) then the boat will track properly--regardless of the keel design.
And having said that, I'll quickly concede that there are a lot of squirrelly boats out there which that want constant attention no matter what you do. I don't think I've ever seen or heard anyone say that a J/24 can tend itself, no matter how the sails are balanced, and no matter how much fun the boats are.
If a boat has to sit on the bottom and wait someplace, for careening or other reasons, a full keel makes sense. But oh, all that extra drag.<G>


----------



## Rockter (Sep 11, 2006)

I dragged one the whole way from Houston to Scotland, and have been happy to drag it around ever since.

In light airs, it gets out-performed, but light airs normally mean some sun where I am from, and I can motor, and I normally don't have too far to go. It has to be very light before I have to motor.

In big seas, the long keel is where it's at. There is plenty of drive from the sails, and ye olde wetted length begins to talk louder, and speed is not really influenced by what's dipping in the drink, and your point of sail does not call in the pointing advantages of the fin keel..... even if you dared try to use them! The directional stability of the long keeler really screams on those ocassions though.... much less helm input needed, and far less tendancy to round up on you before you can stop it.

In big seas, you cannot really go to weather... you get beaten to death and it's horribly hard on the ship. So you don't do it on a long haul.... you run most of the time (I wish). You can reach in light to moderate stuff, but not when the sea builds to any height. It's all right for a while then a wave curls up in front, silently, a wall of water, then wham!! You only need a few of those and you want no more.

The long keel, for me, has been the best compromise. I have tried the deep fin stuff, and they point well, but they made me nervous in the few rough times I encountered. Around a wee race circuit they are fun too, and point high, and my heavy long keeler cannot catch them, but give me the long keel for the distance stuff, and the big seas.

To each his own.... I'll have mine..... and I have tried both.


----------

