[Rhodes22-list] Other boats and IMF's and sail plans for Art C.

Arthur H. Czerwonky czerwonky at earthlink.net
Fri Nov 14 16:38:56 EST 2008 

Ed,
I'm tardy in the suggestion that Stan, fearless leader, made to you long before.  The placement of mast and sail plan can certainly affect balance, but on the surface, I doubt much penalty.  I think the 26 could handle a much bigger sail, just like Stan's prototype apparently can.  The best test of these variables will come from a tank or from actually full scale testing.  Maybe some brave soul can venture into this unknown.  BTW, your point about IMF never installed on the M26 is weak.  I doubt I would ever try it either, given the risks with or without 1400# of water ballast.  Now that wouldn't be a good reason to not try on a heavier boat.

No one else except Stan has put the IMF on a 22 - guess he made his point well, and probably with much trial before switching his norm from the conventional mast.

Art

-----Original Message-----
>From: Tootle <ekroposki at charter.net>
>Sent: Nov 14, 2008 8:42 AM
>To: rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org
>Subject: [Rhodes22-list]  Other boats and IMF's and sail plans for Art C.
>
>
>Art,
>
>In regards to putting another style mast and sail on other boats requires
>more than changing stays, mast base and some hardware.  Naval Architects
>analysis hull shape, center of buoyancy, center of effort, stability and
>other technical factors to determine sail plan efficiency and safety.
>  
>I have said many times on this form, I was in Vermont when the guy capsized
>his brothers Mac 26 and killed two kids.  He did not adequately fill the
>water ballast and the kids were not wearing life preservers. 
>
>Adding a IMF to a Mac 26 without adequate analysis of the mentioned above
>would just as dangerous.  Yes, you should hold your breath and not have
>anyone else on the boat.
>
>While I was rebuilding the O’Day 26 I asked Commodore Spitzer several
>technical questions.  Together we went over the potential of putting his IMF
>on the boat. Stan has put his mast on other boats, generally equal or
>smaller in size.  
> 
>You said, “Given that most of the driving power comes from the genny, and
>your's would be a 155-175% versus a 130, I suspect a net gain.”  I would
>suggest that you are wrong.  You assume that all sail power comes from the
>genny.  I sincerely question that assumption.  Yes, on this forum that has
>been stated that is so on the Rhodes 22.  I would question whether all sail
>plans that include a foresail get significant power from that sail.  And you
>have not begun to analysis slot effect.
>
>The sail plan for this boat is small foresail and large main sail.  I am not
>a Navel Architect not do I have Stan’s over 60 years of experience of sails
>on different boats.  Off hand I would say that on the existing sail plan the
>work of the sails on this boat is coming from the large main.  The foresail
>provides pointing ability and slot effect.
> 
>Also, C. Raymond Hunt designed many sail plans for his racing son, Jim Hunt. 
>While Ray was probably not involved, Jim was president of O’Day at the time. 
>Since both are sailing the wild blue yonder we cannot ask the questions. 
>John Deknatel will not speak to the subjects, for whatever are his reasons. 
>There is very little documentation.  Probably most of the knowledge was in
>their heads.
>
>The boom on this boat is even longer than the boom on its cousin the O’Day
>25.  If you look at pictures of the ‘Skipjack’ and cat boats then you get
>the idea of the sail plan used on it.  An IMF sail plan might require a
>different location for the mast.  Mast are not stuck anywhere on a sailboat. 
>Their location is intrinsic in the boat’s design and projected sail plan.
>
>I have to ask, what would be the effect on stability of going to a large 175
>Genoa as its foresail?  You have already disregarded the concept of
>stability in suggesting putting an IMF on a water ballasted boat.  Do any of
>the boats using water ballast use an IMF?  If not, ask why not.
>
>There are many good books on sailboat design and all usually discuss sail
>plans.  There are also several good books on sails, for example, The Art and
>Science of Sails by Tom Whidden of North Sails.
>
>I am not precluding an IMF on this boat, although because of its age I
>question any large expenditure.  However, I suggest that some good analysis
>would be a good approach.  I would suggest that weight aloft needs to be
>competently evaluated on stability of new sail plan.
>  
>Ed K
>
>see:  See:  http://www.bertram31.com/ray_hunt.htm
>
>
>
>
>hparsons wrote:
>> 
>> Don't know if you mean the Mac26 that is also a powerboat. If so, I 
>> don't think that's an experiment I'd try. That boat is very tender when 
>> that ballast is empty for "power boating" mode. I would avoid any 
>> modifications.
>> 
>> Arthur H. Czerwonky wrote:
>>> Herb,
>>> Looking at a snapshot of the O'Day 26, the spreaders are straight out, so
>>> the upper and lower side stays should be compatable (modified only for
>>> length).  The shoe for the mast bottom is available from Rudy Nickerson
>>> (D&R Marine in Mass).  Ed would have a neat craft with that IMF attached,
>>> especially nice with the large genny and the additional ballast.  Nice 26
>>> advertised in Racine Wisconsin.  I have been tempted to put an IMF on a
>>> Mac26 with full water ballast and hold my breath.
>>> Art
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>   
>>>> From: Herb Parsons <hparsons at parsonsys.com>
>>>> Sent: Nov 12, 2008 9:58 PM
>>>> To: The Rhodes 22 Email List <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
>>>> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] O'Day 26 w. IMF
>>>>
>>>> Actually, that last little bit is intriguing. The O'Day's mast is deck 
>>>> stepped, using a a plate, really looks more like a shoe. It would be 
>>>> pretty easy to buy another one of those, attach the other mast, and 
>>>> switch it out.
>>>>
>>>> The shrouds would be another story, but it's not like you'd have to 
>>>> redesign half the boat to do it as an experiment.
>>>>
>>>> On thing I would be cautious about, the O'Day only has 6 stays total, 
>>>> forestay, back stay, and two shrouds on each side.
>>>>
>>>> Arthur H. Czerwonky wrote:
>>>>     
>>>>> Ed,
>>>>>
>>>>> Given that most of the driving power comes from the genny, and your's
>>>>> would be a 155-175% versus a 130, I suspect a net gain.  Battened main
>>>>> matters not since you would be using the IMF sail/mast combo with IMF
>>>>> boom.  You would need to add a mid-boom bail and block to the traveler,
>>>>> of course.  I'm not sure about alignment of the spreaders and
>>>>> chainplates.  
>>>>>
>>>>> I was once contemplating installing my spare IMF mast to a non-R22
>>>>> boat, but have never gotten a round tuit.  The mast should fit, and the
>>>>> boat should do about the same as Stan's 26' creation.  Just an idea to
>>>>> chew on. 
>>>>>
>>>>> Art
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>   
>>>>>       
>>>>>> From: Tootle <ekroposki at charter.net>
>>>>>> Sent: Nov 12, 2008 8:27 PM
>>>>>> To: rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org
>>>>>> Subject: [Rhodes22-list]  sailing reply to Arthur
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Art,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rhodes sail  ='s 210
>>>>>>
>>>>>> O'Day sail ='s 278
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On a small boat that is a big difference.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also O'Day is a battened main (4).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Genoa usually 130% standard.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mast height on R = 26
>>>>>> Mast height on O = 28
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ed K
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ed,
>>>>>> I expect the R22 IMF would be nice on your 26' O'Day, although the
>>>>>> stays
>>>>>> would need to be changed.  If the mast were used, the corresponding
>>>>>> boom
>>>>>> would need to be used and the genny also.  I doubt much significant
>>>>>> loss in
>>>>>> speed, alot gained in convenience.
>>>>>> Art
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/sailing-reply-to-Andrew...-tp20468855p20472957.html
>>>>>> Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>     
>>>>>>         
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>   
>>>>>       
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>     
>>>
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>> __________________________________________________
>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>> __________________________________________________
>> 
>> 
>
>-- 
>View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-O%27Day-26-w.-IMF-tp20473804p20500712.html
>Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>__________________________________________________

More information about the Rhodes22-list mailing list