Interesting Sailboats

[PCP]

Originally Posted by Chimbatete

Paulo have you posted the Aquila RP45. Sorry if you have and sorry i dont know how to make image smaller.

Beautiful and versatile racer cruiser. It looks like a missile but it has a nice spacious interior.

Very nice boat. I would love to know the ballast but I cannot find it on their information, but it looks like of one of those boats I was talking about, except this one has a racing interior even if they talk about cruising.

The price looks great, of course the almost naked interior helps and the fact that it is made in China too.

Of course you have to add to that price the transport from China and that is not going to be cheap.

On that big photo it looks a beamy boat because the beam is brought aft.

Well it is not a narrow boat but also not a beamy boat by modern standards. The Aquila has 45ft and a 4.20m beam while a Pogo with 40ft has 4.50m

Actually the Aquila has the same beam as the First 45 even if does not look like, because the beam is brought much more aft:



Regards

Paulo

[PCP]

Nice video about the preparation of the Hamburg boat show, one of the big European ones.

Messe: Die Hanseboot macht sich landfein - YACHT-TV*|*YACHT.DE

On the first image we can see an M34 (made by Archambault for the tour the France), we can see also a Solaris 37, a J 108 a Saare 38, an Heol 7.4 and of course the fleet of Benetaus, Hanse and Halberg Rassy, but most of all they went to sail an Opus 68 (that will be on the floating exposition at the Hamburgh port) a new cruiser designed by Bill Dixon with an amazingly beautiful and creative interior.

http://www.alvkintscher.de/fileadmin..._statement.pdf

lebensraeume-gestalten.de


.....

[PCP]

Originally Posted by Chimbatete

......
Yes it is about money but I think that for 99% of people (not the 1%) who likes to race but not cross oceans yet wants a cozy interiors and something affordable, its boats like the Elans an Salonas that offer the best bang for buck. The only issue I really see with these eastern euro boats are the quality of construction and how they'll hold up over time.

I bet you don't know that many French boats are built in Poland and that the first Elan sailboat was built back in 1962. For 10 years they have built small One Design racing boats: Flying Junior, Racing Europe S-430, S425 and S-375. The First cruising boat was built in 1972.

In 1984 an Elan 31 won the production boat prize at the Half Ton World Championship at Marstrand in Sweden.

Take a look at the Yacht world and you will find 25 year old boats that still maintain a good value.

1988 Elan 43 Sail Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com

Regarding Salona it is another story, it only makes boats since 2002 but it is part of a big multinational company specialized in Plastics ans fiberglass, the AD plastics, founded in 1952. The company makes high quality components for many Industries including auto industry and among their clients are GM, Volvo and Fiat.

Regarding build techniques and materials, you don't won European championships and many European National championships without a quality product nor do you won the European boat of the year trophy (2007).

I have been two times at the factory and I have been sufficiently impressed to think about the possibility of buying one of their boats. Regarding building techniques they use the most modern that boat mass market has to offer. Other brands offer similar building techniques and materials but at a much bigger price.

Salona Yachts - Menu 1

For instance, they use on their boats a stainless steel frame to redistribute the loads of the rig and keel. Other boats have it but they are much more expensive boats like Luffe, X-Yachts, Grand Soleil or Arcona. On the 38 they have gone one step further in achieving maximum stiffness and durability of the boat by adding layers of carbon fibre on carefully analyzed areas of hull inner liner to obtain equilibrium of stainless steel structure and inner liner attached to it.

The slamming zone of the boat has been built a single skin composite in order to avoid shear failure of core material under the heavy loads. That area is additionally reinforced with layers of triaxial E-glass fabric.

The use of transparent gel coat and vinilester epoxy resin during the vacuum infusion of the hull is another step towards the superior hull strength and durabilty.

The deck is sandwich built with a structural design incorporating a ceiling inner liner to better withstand high longitudinal and transverse loads.

Aft and bow bulkheads are completely watertight, thus preventing the possibility of water intrusion in case the exposed parts of the boat (bow and stern) are damaged. Due to strong sandwich construction these bulkheads add extra strength and safety, preserving the weight at the same time.


http://www.salonayachts.com/documents/PR_Salona38.pdf

I may be wrong, as everybody, but besides being a good sail boat with a good interior the main reason that has me interested in the Salona 38 is its built quality and strength. As I have said, I could find similar products, for instance in the X yachts, but at a price I cannot afford.

Regards

Paulo

[PCP]

Originally Posted by bjung

Paulo,
I think the reasoning for HR to build a larger 372, was not out of pressure by X yachts, but simply dictated by the immense success of the 372. In 2 years, HR built more than 70 HR372's. I would be interrested how many XC 38's have been built.

I recently had the opportunity to crew on the delivery of a HR 372 from Connecticut to the Annapolis Show. The performance, seaworthiness, and layout/ functionality down below is about as perfect as I could imagine. Designed with sailing and comfortable life aboard in mind.

As far as performance, we knocked off about 200 nm a day, in a combination of motoring, sailing and motor-sailing. Hard on the wind, we clocked about 6kn in 10kn wind, and I saw the speed climb to above 8 kn in 14 kn wind on a beam reach. Cruising World did a testsail after the Show, in 15-20kn wind, we'll see what they have to say.
The problem for me: This trip has made it very hard to appreciate affordable production boats ( with the sticker: "starting at" )at the Annapolis Show, as the HR 372 really set the bar for what I am personally looking for in a vessel.
I wonder where Mega Millions Lottery jackpot is today......
Bernd

Bernd, I said it was for two reasons: because the 372 was selling well while the 37 center cockpit, that they had maintained on their line, almost did not sell and because while HR only had the 372 on their line of aft cruising faster boats, X yachts had a full line of cruisers (38 - 42- 45- 50) deigned with similar characteristics of the 372. And also because all Xc cruising line of boats were selling very well, taking clients away from HR.

Xc cruising boats and Halberg Rassy share the same market segment. XC were more modern and faster boats and what the 372 and its sells showed to HR (as well as the good results from XC yachts) was that sailors wanted more modern boats and HR got the message and is not losing time. Now it will have a new aft 40ft and in no time it will be a full range.

In some time I will bet that HR is going to finish with center cockpit range boats till 45 or 50 ft boat. The market is the king and center cockpit boats are selling less

The Xc 38 is very similar to the HR 372 but curiously a more stiff and even more seaworthy boat. The HR has a B/D ratio of 0.386, the Xc38 an huge 0.424, it is more heavy (8500kg to 7500kg) but with more 7m2 of sail to compensate. Probably the sail performances is very close. The XC 38 is a more stiff boat not only by that bigger B/D ratio but also by a bit more beam (3.81m to 3.60). I am not saying the HR is not stiff, it is, but the XC 38 is really a model in that regard.

Two great boats. I had already posted about both on this thread and I am not surprised you loved the 372. You would also have loved the Xc 38 if you had the chance to sail one

http://www.x-yachts.com/seeems.asp?id=97150

http://www.hallberg-rassy.com/

Regards

Paulo

[PCP]

Talking about beautiful boats it is difficult to find a more beautiful one:

Racing on the J Class Sloop Velsheda on Vimeo

Even if it takes 30 sailors to have it at full blast

[estaban]

Originally Posted by PCP

Perhaps you can leave that number ["Q": ballast*draft/weight] as an indicator of reserve stability and can get another formula to initial stability. That is not going to be an easy one because beam increases a lot initial stability. I have no idea of the factor but I am sure that a simple multiplication will not be enough (not even close) to account for the initial stability provided by the increase in beam.

To complicate things, more ballast and a lower ballast also increases initial stability even if in a much more moderate way.

To find a formula that will integrate all these factors will not be an easy task and will require a lot of work and a constant match with reality, using reference boat data to see if the formula works.

A problem which appears in all kinds of fields is that people are always wanting to reduce multidimensional things, or even curves, to single numbers. This fundamentally can't be done.

But that isn't to say we couldn't in principle anyway have a small set of numbers that would give us good approximation of the overall picture.

In practice, actually getting this from the manufacturers is probably beyond hope: one can't even get minimum sailing displacement let alone design sailing displacement in most instances.

But in a dream world if we had:

A) Resistance to heel at zero degrees, divided by sailing displacement
B) The designer's value for optimum heel angle at some condition, and resistance to heel at that angle, divided by SD
C) Resistance to heel at some standardized angle that people would find intuitive, say 45 degrees, divided by SD, and
D) Energies required to capsize from angles B and C, divided by SD

Then that would give a pretty good handle.

Chance of them all giving us these? None.

We can probably get A, and with curves we can figure D from any angle we like, if we had sailing displacement.

In the meantime, ballpark ideas are all that is possible probably though I've seen you've done a great deal of work on it.

[bobperry]

Ballast does not have much effect at all at very low heel angles.
Hull form has a lot to do with stability at low heel angles. I call that "initial stability".
What is this "optimum heel angle" stuff? Most designers will tell you its zero degrees. In any boat in order to get max performance you try and sail the boat upright. In very light air there can be advantages to heeling the boat as the sails fall into their natural shape and there can be a reduction in wetted surface. But this is only for very light air.
In order for a boat to have any righting moment is has to heel. You only get Rm when the Cb moves of to leeward and the VCG moves off to weather. So at zero degrees the boat is in an unstable state as Cb and VCG are lined up.

[PCP]

Originally Posted by estaban

....

But in a dream world if we had:

A) Resistance to heel at zero degrees, divided by sailing displacement
B) The designer's value for optimum heel angle at some condition, and resistance to heel at that angle, divided by SD
C) Resistance to heel at some standardized angle that people would find intuitive, say 45 degrees, divided by SD, and
D) Energies required to capsize from angles B and C, divided by SD

Then that would give a pretty good handle.

Chance of them all giving us these? None.

We can probably get A, and with curves we can figure D from any angle we like, if we had sailing displacement.

In the meantime, ballpark ideas are all that is possible probably though I've seen you've done a great deal of work on it.

Hi Estaban,

If you really insist and if they see that you would not buy the boat without stability data the factory will provide you with a stability curve made by the boat designer and used to certify the boat. It can be a GZ curve (arm length) or a RM curve (righting moment). You can turn a GZ curve in a RM curve multiplying each value by the boat displacement.

If you use a RM curve you can calculate all those values. The energy needed to capsize the boat from a certain point of heel is equal to the area behind the curve, from that point to the AVS (or LPS), the point were the righting moment is 0.

About the resistance to heel at 0º I don't understand what you mean. You have to explain that better. At 0º the boat is not heeled .

Regards

Paulo

[PCP]

Originally Posted by bobperry

Ballast does not have much effect at all at very low heel angles.
Hull form has a lot to do with stability at low heel angles. I call that "initial stability".
What is this "optimum heel angle" stuff? Most designers will tell you its zero degrees. In any boat in order to get max performance you try and sail the boat upright. In very light air there can be advantages to heeling the boat as the sails fall into their natural shape and there can be a reduction in wetted surface. But this is only for very light air.
In order for a boat to have any righting moment is has to heel. You only get Rm when the Cb moves of to leeward and the VCG moves off to weather. So at zero degrees the boat is in an unstable state as Cb and VCG are lined up.

Bob, you are more than welcome to this thread

If you have followed it you have seen that it is about all types of sailing boats and their sailing characteristics and your expert opinion would be very valuable.

Regarding the information that is provided by the boat designers (GZ and RM curves) I have some doubts about its comparative value.

Can you give a look here and give me your opinion, I mean about the subject of the first post (for additional information you can look at the other posts from Polux on that thread):

Misleading stability - Yachting and Boating World Forums

Regards

Paulo

[JohnRPollard]

I hope this design meets the thread criteria for "Interesting Sailboats."

Test Sailing a Pacific Proa