Author Topic: BBSC  (Read 29973 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ross_burkin

  • Guru's Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 602
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: BBSC
« Reply #15 on: February 13, 2008, 09:44:47 AM »
I was asking about the Elway Will  ;)
2675 Fuzzy Logic  97/05 rules

Serious plannage in the works...

Offline Will_Lee

  • Former_Member
  • Guru's Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 1290
  • Karma: +4/-0
Re: BBSC
« Reply #16 on: February 13, 2008, 11:13:42 AM »
Really light, but it doesn't mean anything until the bulkheads etc are in.

W

Offline phil_kirk

  • Former_Member
  • Guru's Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 1722
  • Karma: +10/-2
Re: BBSC
« Reply #17 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?

Offline Will_Lee

  • Former_Member
  • Guru's Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 1290
  • Karma: +4/-0
Re: BBSC
« Reply #18 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

Offline smight at bbsc

  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 40
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: BBSC
« Reply #19 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

Offline Will_Lee

  • Former_Member
  • Guru's Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 1290
  • Karma: +4/-0
Re: BBSC
« Reply #20 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.


Offline phil_kirk

  • Former_Member
  • Guru's Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 1722
  • Karma: +10/-2
Re: BBSC
« Reply #21 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.

Offline smight at bbsc

  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 40
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: BBSC
« Reply #22 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.

Offline neal_gibson

  • Apprentice Guru
  • ***
  • Posts: 164
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • sending it
    • Storrar Marine
Re: BBSC
« Reply #23 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.
2644 Suicide Blonde

The Northern ONE
Resident Sailmaker

Damage count so far this season
1) RS Feva mast easy
2) Cherub Main Fixed
3) VW BORA Gone forever bugger
4) One cherub boom Debi does ass damage fixed now.

lucy_lee

  • Guest
Re: BBSC
« Reply #24 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

Offline ross_burkin

  • Guru's Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 602
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: BBSC
« Reply #25 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.
2675 Fuzzy Logic  97/05 rules

Serious plannage in the works...

mathew_harris

  • Guest
Re: BBSC
« Reply #26 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?

Offline Phil Alderson

  • Administrator
  • Guru's Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 1144
  • Karma: +28/-0
    • www.largssc.co.uk
Re: BBSC
« Reply #27 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.
3218 Zero Gravitas
2683 Pocket Rocket For Sale

Offline JimC

  • Guru's Assistant
  • ****
  • Posts: 423
  • Karma: +10/-1
Re: BBSC
« Reply #28 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!.