Yes we do, Paulo. Let me know whenever you would be in the neighbourhood of Nieuwpoort and we will have fun together
Yes, I would like to meet you and do that
. Maybe next year on my cruising spring voyage (by car) I would do that. Anyway I love Flemish country and cities. I have also friends there.
First of all, to let things clear, not properly to you but to all, let me say that I love the Pogo design. That design is associated with proposing a boat with amazing performances at a price people can buy (at leat some
). Other type of fast boats with more ballast ratio and more narrow are more expensive to build and also more difficult to sail near the limits, specially downwind.
That does not mean that the boat is perfect and has not weak points and strong points neither it is the best answer to all sailors or all sailing conditions, even considering speed alone.
I ‘ve seen VPP and VMG figures that suggest the Pogo 12.50 should even be able to keep up with a racer such as the X41 upwind (fastsailing.gr - The crazy polar diagrams - VMG at all angles - The yacht , Stunningly fast!
When I look at our actual upwind GPS tracks on the screen, I find this very hard to believe. But as we learn, especially about trimming, we definitely make progress. Who knows, one day… As soon as we can collect reliable data and have made sensible comparisons on the water, I’ll certainly let you know....
But as Paulo stated, even apart from handicap considerations (horrible for any Pogo, designed without any consideration for any handicap rule), racing results indicate we will very probably never be able to stand out in an upwind course.
Those polar consider flat water. The Pogo type design will not have a problem going fast upwind on flat water, even if a bit more off the wind.
The problem of those designs has to do with going fast upwind with waves.
The bigger the waves the worse is the performance. That has to do with wave drag that is increasing exponentially in that boat when crashing through waves, making it lose more power than the one the boat can generate over other type of boats. Of course the big power needed to go on those conditions and the big wave drag make also the boat very uncomfortable in that particular case.
I have saw that 40 class racers, that are a much more powerful boat than your Pogo, have not good performances when they got nasty weather upwind. On the last "around NZ race really nasty weather lead to the abandon of the Pogo 40 class racer that was having a bad performance, beaten even by narrow old boats, but that were really very bad conditions. Other boats with the same type of design also experienced difficulties and an overall bad performance. The guys on the Pogo were good, they are one of the main racing teams on that side of the world and the only one that races (for years) with a 40class boat on ocean races. It is the same team that had made several Sydney-Hobart with that boat.
Concerning B/D ratio, I think the draught should also be taken into consideration. There must be a big difference in righting moment, and thus in both security and power, between the same ballast weight in a 2m deep massive cast iron keel or in a 3m deep composite construction with all the weight in lead and in in the bottom section. As far as I know only Structures is offering this latter kind of build for cruisers and I understand they want to keep the details of this design for themselves.
On the other hand, the much lower centre of gravity will act even more like a pendulum which, together with the overall light weight design, should result in a less comfortable motion against waves. That’s probably also why we should not try to sail close-hauled but concentrate upon keeping up both speed and power by bearing down a little.
Regarding this I have to disagree with you. A narrow foil with a torpedo has a better performance than your swing keel. It offers less drag (less surface) and it brings the CG lower.
Have a look at the picture on the JPK 38. The keel CG is marked on each one and you can see that is remarkably lower on the torpedo keel:
This is a similar keel to the one that you have in your boat. Highly efficient for a swing keel but not a match for a fixed top keel. That is why for the same ballast the Pogo has to have a bigger draft on the swing keel (kell down) than on the fixed keel.
Both boat with the fixed keel with about the same draft have the same ballast (1900kg) but the JPK is smaller and therefore lighter.
Regarding the weight of your boat, I would very much liked to see its "real" weight because I have some difficulty in believing in the 5500Kg that are given by the factory. The designer gives it more weight and I would still be waiting to see a boat that could be made with less weight than the one that is given by a designer like Finot. Normally the finished boat has more weight, not less.
I say this because the difference in weight between the JPK 38 and the Pogo 12.50, as stated by the factories is only 500kg. Being the ballast, the constructions techniques and materials the same I have some difficulty accepting that a substantially more beamy and several ft longer boat would have such a small difference. About a 1000kg difference should seam more natural to me, considering they are both top builders that use race boat technology.
Regarding that less comfortable motion against the waves due to a "pendulum effect" I believe you are wrong. When there are waves there is wind and the boat will be strongly "tied" to a side by the wind force and there is no wave that is going to make it roll from one side to the other. As I have explained the substantially bigger beam on the Pogo will make him less comfortable on waves due to a superior wave drag.
What you saying related with the pendulum effect can happen downwind but not in a boat like the JPK that has already a considerable beam and a lot of form stability. That would happen surely on the Aspect 40 if the crew is not on top of it and by crew I don't mean a single guy
That could be a problem on those racers (or very fast performance boats) narrow and with almost 50% of ballast on a very deep keel. As I have said already, that associated with the shape of the hull (that permits more heel before a greater hull stability) is the reason those boats are tricky to sail downwind. They can go very fast but they need a crew to balance perfectly the boat and not allow that rolling movement.
The JPK 38 has not only a considerable beam but also a hull shape that don't allow great angles of heel, like the Pogo. The JPK 38 is really a mix between the hull shape of a Pogo and that for instance of an A35, trying to get advantages from both sides. Off course it will not be as good downwind as a Pogo, but will be more comfortable and better upwind (taking into consideration the different sizes of the boats) or at least is how I see it