Choosing a boat for extended cruising

  • 13 Mar 2018 00:53
    Reply # 5968431 on 5880436
    Deleted user

    Keep the wife happy!

    That’s where I’m at. If my wife is not keen on a particular type of vessel, game over. 

    Sailing solo is all about what you want. 

    Wife’s not happy? We dont get a boat, simple. Some are lucky to be allowed to spend money on a vessel and go off. Not me. So compromising is a tough thing to do, but if it means sailing then i have to just suck it up and sail on.

  • 07 Mar 2018 17:08
    Reply # 5902242 on 5899470
    David Tyler wrote:

    The performance disadvantage is chiefly due to having much more surface area and therefore skin friction than strictly necessary; but possibly also because triple keels are less hydrodynamically effective than twin keels,

    With twin keels it is possible to have assymetrical keel profile (like a wing) with non "parallele" keels in order to have the leeward keel in incidence and the other with no portance by taking advantage of the keels' incidence difference due to the draft. For example, with a 5° draft windward sailing and 5° of pinch between the two keels the leeward keel would have an incidence of 7.5° with a vertical performant assymetrical profile and the other would have a -2.5° incidence that may be (for that particular profile) the no-lift incidence of the assymetrical profile. In this example, running downwind, the two keels would have a 2.5° incidence.

    The surface issu is more sensitive in light winds and becomes non significant (for cruising boats) as soon as the wind is sufficient.



    Last modified: 08 Mar 2018 07:42 | Anonymous member
  • 07 Mar 2018 14:35
    Reply # 5900451 on 5880436

    Yes, I think that the bilge keels of a triple keeler are no more than "built in legs", and do not add to the performance, rather the opposite. I even considered chopping Ivory Gull's bilge keels off, for that reason, as I thought there would be a gain in integrity, with no loss in performance.

    Badger has had bilge keels added, now that she has retired from ocean-going and lives on a drying mooring, but these are foil-section steel fabrications. 

  • 07 Mar 2018 14:21
    Reply # 5900298 on 5899470
    Deleted user
    Thanks for that David.

    I had forgotten that the GRP version of the GH still had flat steel plates for bilge keels - mine are moulded in, and I've never had cause to doubt their strength when taking the ground.

    The skin friction argument seems good to me, but I am inadequately equipped to judge the hydrodynamic one. I note from Terry Erskine's brochure that for customers ordering the GRP version for 'extended deep-water cruising' the bilge keels could be left off. Presumably this indicates a hydrodynamic argument for not having them when tidal conditions did not require them.

    JRA member Iain Grigor has cruised in a Golden Hind - perhaps he'll give us his opinion?

    Chris


  • 07 Mar 2018 13:30
    Reply # 5899470 on 5880436

    Chris,

    One factor is related to the comment that Eric made about the fraught time one can have whilst drying out. The bilge keels, whether moulded in (Ivory Gull) or bolted-on steel plates (Golden Hind), are not as strong, and as strongly attached, as either the central ballast keel or twin ballast keels need to be. I remember an occasion when I miscalculated the tide height by a few centimetres, and spent an anxious couple of hours at the bottom of the tide, swaying to and fro with the very small waves, no more than ripples really. The central keel was firmly aground and each bilge keel was slamming down onto the hard sand (I try to dry out at half tide, when possible, so that it takes the least time from first touch to being settled down firmly). This doesn't happen in the same way with twin keels, and anyway, if they're not up to thumping down onto a hard sand bottom, there's something seriously unsatisfactory with the construction of the boat. 

    The performance disadvantage is chiefly due to having much more surface area and therefore skin friction than strictly necessary; but possibly also because triple keels are less hydrodynamically effective than twin keels, though my reasoning is a bit woolly, and I wouldn't want to defend that thought against rigorous examination. I did find with Ivory Gull that there was much more leeway than I thought there ought to be.

    Twin keels can be very efficient, if properly designed, but I don't think triple keels ever can be. Examples of well designed twin keeled boats are the Sadlers (eg my Sadler 25 Lliutro) and Hunters (eg my Hunter Duette Weaverbird), and the newer RM890, but I can't think of a triple keeled boat that sails well to windward.

    Last modified: 07 Mar 2018 13:46 | Anonymous member
  • 07 Mar 2018 13:06
    Reply # 5898966 on 5893804
    David Tyler wrote:

    I should really practice what I preach, and only speak whereof I know. I haven't sailed a Golden Hind, so far as I remember, so withdraw my adverse comments on the design. 

    So, how about those amongst us who have actually sailed a Golden Hind, or (better) have owned one, putting forward the case for the defence?
  • 07 Mar 2018 13:04
    Reply # 5898928 on 5880436
    Deleted user

    Hi David

    I think I'm missing something (wouldn't be a first). Why are twin keels better than the triple keel in non-tidal areas you mention? Both have the twin keels, pretty much for the same reason, and with the same disadvantages cf. a deeper fin keel. One just has the additional long ballast keel

    Apart from awkward access for cleaning/antifouling (to which I can testify) what are the performance disadvantages of triple keels compared to twin keels?

    Chris
  • 07 Mar 2018 08:26
    Reply # 5893804 on 5880436

    I should really practice what I preach, and only speak whereof I know. I haven't sailed a Golden Hind, so far as I remember, so withdraw my adverse comments on the design. Except for this: the triple keel concept has its place in the scheme of things, in areas of the world where drying out is an everyday experience. That would include the Irish Sea, the Thames Estuary, the north coast of Brittany, the Frisian coast and suchlike places. It would not include tideless places such as the Mediterranean, the Caribbean and Polynesia, where Raymond proposes to cruise. There, you have only the negative aspects of the bilge keels plus central ballast keel, with no positive advantages to balance them. Twin keels are a better option. 

  • 06 Mar 2018 20:29
    Reply # 5892822 on 5880436
    Deleted user

    I've always been convinced that the designer of my boat, Ken Evans, must have cribbed from Maurice Griffiths' Golden Hind 28.5 - it's near-identical except for the round bilges and raised coach roof. John Williams, the co-ordinator of the Eventide Owners Group, agrees. Perhaps this is why I feel drawn to the defence of the GH.

    At one time, the Golden Hind 31 had made more transatlantic crossings than any other production boat. Even by the time production in Plymouth ended in 1982, it had done more than 30 Atlantic crossings, at least seven trips from the UK to Aus/NZ and a few circumnavigations. Yachting Monthly described the GH31 as "tough, sea kindly and ideal as a sturdy offshore cruiser".

    There is a 34' junk schooner-rigged steel version, Jua, which has made two Atlantic crossings and has done thousands of miles of cruising in UK and US waters. According to her owners, she handled some very rough conditions with ease.

    Chris

    https://i.pinimg.com/564x/e3/83/a4/e383a4590e4c2a0324bda052b4a7f3b7.jpg

    Last modified: 06 Mar 2018 20:31 | Deleted user
  • 06 Mar 2018 00:53
    Reply # 5891408 on 5880436
    Deleted user

    Golden Hind looks great !

    and even saw one in steel.

    and bilge keel.

    Thanks. Raymond

       " ...there is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing as simply messing about in junk-rigged boats" 
                                                               - the Chinese Water Rat

                                                              Site contents © the Junk Rig Association and/or individual authors

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software