UK-Cherub Forum

Off Topic => Banter => Topic started by: smight at bbsc on February 05, 2008, 05:51:56 PM

Title: BBSC
Post by: smight at bbsc on February 05, 2008, 05:51:56 PM
Hey it's George from bough beech. not officially a cherub sailor but i thought i'd join in for a chat.  Just wondering weather bbsc should expect the arrival of a new cherub any time soon (will and lucy) And weather rolly will be down at the weekend?

Cheers

George
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: Will_Lee on February 05, 2008, 07:33:07 PM
Hi George,

It's not just us that's building! There's six or even possibly seven others in build too I think.

(Note: I say "We are building", which is a lie. We are not building. Andy P is building)

I don't know what Roland is doing this weekend.

From the point of view of taking our boat to BBSC, I think we'll just concentrate on getting the boat finished first!

BW

Will
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: smight at bbsc on February 05, 2008, 08:03:50 PM
Ah i see well the 600 is coming along quite well. I can almost keep it upright all the time  ;D What stage is the boat at now?

Cheers

George
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: ross_burkin on February 06, 2008, 12:45:02 AM
6 or 7!
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: Will_Lee on February 06, 2008, 07:33:24 PM
I'll tell you after the weekend.
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: ross_burkin on February 07, 2008, 10:42:09 PM
Does this mean a few boats are coming up for sale? I have a friend who is thinking of going Cherub. He sails SMODS but has all these crazy ideas of what he could do to them.
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: Will_Lee on February 08, 2008, 07:00:45 PM
Loco and Atum have both got new homes already.

The Trifle and Lost In Space are both on the secondhand boat list, both good entry level boats.

W
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: Stuart Hopson on February 08, 2008, 10:13:05 PM
Loco and Atum have both got new homes already.

 ;D
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: ross_burkin on February 12, 2008, 08:42:15 AM
I'll tell you after the weekend.


Right, it's Tuesday. SPILL.
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: Will_Lee on February 12, 2008, 09:00:48 AM
Hull completed. Deck completed. Many decisions made about many things including gantry, wingbars, wing support tubes, understays, shroud fittings, shroudbase, jib fitting, launch tube, jib track (which will be a 49er one again), kite hoop, bulkheads, board position (leading edge = 1.98m from stem), bungholes, etc etc .

I am officially excited!

Will
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: simon_jones on February 12, 2008, 09:50:24 AM
So, are we going to see any of these shiny new toys at the dinghy show? ???
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: ross_burkin on February 12, 2008, 10:25:46 PM
I think thats the plan.  Are we going to have the Hartley Daemon on the stand as well? It would look good with that wonderful price tag. We should park it next to the RS800 stand.  ;D

Will, do you know what she weighed in at?
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: Stuberry on February 13, 2008, 05:59:12 AM
Will, how far back is the mast on the new boat? I took loads of measurements of the top boats at the Inters, and one of the measurements I took was the mast and board position. Will be interesting to know for comparitive purposes.
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: Will_Lee on February 13, 2008, 09:08:14 AM
Sorry Ross, no idea the weight of Badgers Nadgers, though Subtle Knife was light I think.

Stu, the front of our mast is 1.98m back from the end of the snout, and the front of the board is 2.26m from the end of the snout.

Will
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: Stuberry on February 13, 2008, 09:43:30 AM
That is about 20cm further forward than the skiffs. No suprises there....

Is it the same position as on Atum Bom? Or did you learn a lesson from Atum and reposition?
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: ross_burkin on February 13, 2008, 09:44:47 AM
I was asking about the Elway Will  ;)
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: Will_Lee on February 13, 2008, 11:13:42 AM
Really light, but it doesn't mean anything until the bulkheads etc are in.

W
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: phil_kirk on February 13, 2008, 12:59:19 PM
I recall NBS had the mast at 2.00m aft of the snout.  Do we think this is the limit people will go to.

The dog has the mast at 1.63m aft of the snout giving a modest amount of room in the cockpit but litle foredeck space.

With the mast further aft the space for helm and crew gets quite small.  Is the Elway 5 having a gnav or temple vang to allow more room for the two of you to cross the boat during manoeuvers or are you just going to fight for it?

With the mast further aft the light wind crewing space is solved with a bigger foredeck to squat on.

What style of gantry are you going for?
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: Will_Lee on February 13, 2008, 01:32:10 PM
Atum: 1.93m
New boat: 1.98m

We are having an ordinary kicker, but the tang has gone forward 100mm to only 500mm from the mast. I also hope to have a more straightforward exit out the back of the boat to increase room.b Having said that, the gantry is shorter: only 300mm (450mm before) to load up the T foil more.

BW

Will
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: smight at bbsc on February 13, 2008, 08:44:22 PM
We (my self and rory) look forward to racing you at bbsc in the 14  ;D Why have you gone for the kicker option. Is it because the gnav supposedly does funny things to the mast bend?

Cheers

George
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: Will_Lee on February 14, 2008, 09:09:46 AM
A vang is lighter, doesn't upset the mainsail, gives mrsdrlee something to grab on light airs gybes, and we understand how to work it.

I liked the gnav on the 29er we sailed, and I think they are a good idea. Just an innovation too far this time.

Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: phil_kirk on February 14, 2008, 12:42:28 PM
With a lot of experience in the class evolution of what you know works is more likely to give an improvement in performance than exploring the unknown.

Is it going to be on the stand for the dinghy show?

i'll remember to bring my tape measure.
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: smight at bbsc on February 14, 2008, 06:06:11 PM
A vang is lighter, doesn't upset the mainsail, gives mrsdrlee something to grab on light airs gybes, and we understand how to work it.

I liked the gnav on the 29er we sailed, and I think they are a good idea. Just an innovation too far this time.



All good points, fair enough but surely if you make the gnav out of cabon fiber it will be lighter, because there will be less string and blocks.
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: neal_gibson on February 14, 2008, 06:24:06 PM
for the gnav to be strong enough its going to be quite heavy also you will need almost the same amount of blocks if not more for the gnav over the kicker, to run the system. plus its more rope too i do believe i may be wrong i mayvbe right who knows who cares.
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: lucy_lee on February 14, 2008, 07:21:43 PM
Basically I vetoed gnavs becuase all they seem to do is break and cause trouble, except when they are too heavy, even then one on the 29XX broke in Hyeres in no wind at all.

I can understand why a 12 footer might want one, with a gorrilla in the front of the boat and a foredeck, but on the 14 I sailed it seemed a bit daft: we could have swung a couple of cats arong on the tacks & gybes & no-one would have noticed.

A vang is light and works fine. When it comes to room in the boat: in light wind I am in front of the mast so it isn't an issue, in heavy weather we are at the back so no issue there either.

Right, back to MCQs
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: ross_burkin on February 14, 2008, 11:08:18 PM
In Brightlingsea I picked up Dave's new gnav and I don’t remember it being heavy but it was HUGE. This was because the last one snapped in France (correct me if I'm wrong) and Dave had chosen to go with the "bigger is better" approach. This might not result in a "heavy" bit of boat but it might end up being heavier than a kicker arrangement.
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: mathew_harris on February 18, 2008, 11:27:30 AM
will, on the vague topic of the new boat, do you two have a name in mind yet?
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: Phil Alderson on February 18, 2008, 12:54:55 PM
A vang is lighter, doesn't upset the mainsail, gives mrsdrlee something to grab on light airs gybes, and we understand how to work it.

I liked the gnav on the 29er we sailed, and I think they are a good idea. Just an innovation too far this time.



All good points, fair enough but surely if you make the gnav out of cabon fiber it will be lighter, because there will be less string and blocks.



A gnav like on the 29er is a very good idea for a one-design because it lets them replace loads of expensave blocks with a simple aluminium plate acting as a lever

most cherubs and 14's seem to have gone for the fixed point on mast, slide along the boom type, this is probably because it is simpler to construct than getting all the dimentions of the leaver exactly right.

the problem with building out of carbon is that you nead several bearings, which act as point loads and they need to move. You need to bond on some sort of bearing surface for the pivot while keeping the whole thing strong and small. which is tricky.

In adition when you fall on a string under load it is normally OK a strut on the otherhand will quickly become two struts.

I think Aqua(which had a kicker) would have benifited from the gnav more than Primal(which has a gnav) becuase of the shroud positions and the need to go infront of the mast in light winds on Primal.
Title: Re: BBSC
Post by: JimC on February 20, 2008, 12:52:57 PM
If you're a stump rig fan the push kicker would lose all the benefits of keeping the kicker loads out of the mast - unless you do what Andy has on his Canoe which is to have a stump that goes two feet above the gooseneck to catch the push loads!.