Sailing Performance (Warning Rant Ahead)

Technical information and geeky boat stuff
Post Reply
User avatar
Bluenose
Candidate for Boat-Obsession Medal
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 4:19 pm
Boat Name: Bolero
Boat Type: Modified Shields One Design
Location: Lopez Island, WA
Contact:

Sailing Performance (Warning Rant Ahead)

Post by Bluenose »

One of my pet peeves is how poorly the average sailboat sails these days. One of the best descriptions that I have read on the topic comes from ?The Proper Yacht" by Arthur Beiser (written in 1966).
I believe that the majority of cruising boats today carry rigs that are too small for both performance and convenience. No sailboat should need half a gale or some absurd expedients as oversized genoas and spinnakers in order to really go, yet that is precisely the case far too often. Most weather in most parts of the world contains a good percentage of light winds, and it is simply a crime to design and build a sailboat unable to move well under such conditions. It is not just the that one of the keener joys of sailing is to ghost along in a zephyr; on a long trip, proficiency in light airs usually means days saved.

The shrunken rigs typical of cruising boats have their origins in a number of misconceptions. One is that argument that a large rig is more fragile than a small one and also puts too much stress on the hull. This was certainly true in the past but modern material permits a rig of any size to have any safety margin desired without compromising performance (except in racing, which is not our concern here). And the hull of a properly built modern cruising boat is well able to take all the loads imposed by whatever rig is chosen. An extension of the same train of thought rejects large sails because once upon a time they were heavy and hard to control. Again today's technology comes to the rescue, with soft, lightweight synthetic cloth, strong but supple synthetic line, and powerful multi-speed winches that can incorporate electric drives if desired. Roller furling for jibs, and even for mains, is available to provide further help. So a generous rig need not be any harder to manage than a skimpy one. In fact, experience show that a sizable rig actually makes coping with the sails easier. The point is that with area to spare, one can arrange matters in a seamanlike manner - a well-divided rig, headsails with only moderate overlaps (or none at all), no spinnakers - without worrying about maximum efficiency.

When a person interested in a cruising boat of certain sizes sees a racing boat of that size go by with her army of gorillas all working their tails off, it is natural for him to think, "My God, the rig is too big," and to seek a smaller rig for himself. This reaction does not survive close scrutiny. The basic sail area of a racing boat is heavily taxed by the measurement rule. Accordingly such a boat is obliged to have a rig not larger that absolutely necessary and to rely upon exploiting it to the utmost. Two flukes of the racing rule provide the means the racing boat uses to augment here basic sail area; that part of a jib aft of the mainmast is not counted in the sail area unless it exceeds a generous limit, and spinnakers are also "free" up to a point. Over lapping genoas and huge spinnakers are labor-intensive expedients, which is no handicap since racing boats are the better for plenty of live ballast anyway. There is no reason for a cruising sailor to let the vagaries of a measurement rule govern his life on the water. With sails large enough in area to provide the push required and sensible enough in design to be servants and not masters, a proper cruiser should be able to sail circles around any racing boats with a crew of the same strength. One wants speed and convenience in a cruiser, pleasure for the few instead of work for the many, and an ample rig is necessary to achieve this goal.

Another argument against enough area for light conditions is that, if the wind picks up sail with have to be shortened. Absolutely correct - but it is not compulsory to carry the largest sails if prudence dictates otherwise on a particular day. Most cruising is done in regions where winds of no more than about 15 knots predominate, and it seems silly to have a boat just right from the Roaring Forties anywhere else.
And a little latter in his discussion:
Since the wetted surface of a boat is rarely stated and is tedious to establish from a lines plan (itself seldom published), the sail area-displacement ratio is the more practical one for comparing different designs. This ratio for the designs in Part Two of this book is platted in the first graph on page 44, and the sail areas themselves against in the second. The average ratio is 16.0, which is greater that the figure of 15.5 often quoted as optimum for cruising yachts and that I consider unduly small.
Much of the current racing rules are the reasons why I have found it so difficult to find another boat. My ideal boat would have a sail area to displacement ratio of between 18 and 20 with a non-overlapping working jib and have a large mainsail area compared to its jib area. This allows me easy sail control from behind the mast by reefing, traveler control and luffing the main through gusts. It would also allow, but not require, me to hank on a huge 150% plus drifter in really light conditions, say down to 3 to 5 knots. This is not a boat that I have found available very often.

I personally don't think that the average sailer is served very well by the racing rules. I want a fast sailboat that sails well. Not a sailboat that can win races. I want a fast sailboat because I want to sail in every possible condition without having to have six other people on board. Because the reason I choose to sail is because I like to sail.

End of Rant

Bill
User avatar
Tim
Shipwright Extraordinaire
Posts: 5708
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2003 6:39 pm
Boat Name: Glissando
Boat Type: Pearson Triton
Location: Whitefield, ME
Contact:

Post by Tim »

I think it's pretty clear that the fastest boats are the ones that are not designed specifically to any racing rule. Racing rules, by design, attempt to place limits and criteria on certain aspects of the design so as to allow boats of various design to be raced fairly against each other (aka the handicap system). Designers find ways to improve performance within the confines of any rule, which has led to some of the oddities in the racing world over the years, such as the "bumpy" IOR boats (hey, I'm a child of the 70s), and even the stubby yawl rigs found on the CCA-era boats. The IMS rule was conceived to attempt to return reason to the design of racing fleets, but of course it didn't take long at all for designers to take advantage of the rules' fine print.

These rule-beating features don't make the boat faster; they make it perform better according to its rating. This wins races, but doesn't necessarily create speed records. Even today's fastest racing designs would be faster if the confines of whatever rule they were designed to were lifted.

Boats that are faster tend to have disadvantageous ratings in a racing fleet. The faster the boat is, the more it is penalized, in a nonlinear sort of manner; that is, it seems to me that really fast boats are penalized a lot more than just fast boats. The fastest of these boats can almost never truly sail to their rating in a handicapped fleet, which reinforces my beliefs.

Everyone will agree, I think, that (for example) J-Boats are fast as a general rule. The wide variety of J-Boats, from the J-24 to today's huge cruising machines, are all designed to be slippery, fast, and easy to sail--ratings be damned. Because the boats are fast and easy to sail, they often perform well in mixed fleets regardless of their rating, but the rating tends hurts the boat in the end.

Cruising boats need not be slow. True cruising boats do require certain amenities and weight-carrying capacity in order to function according to their design mantra. Cruising boats should have plenty of sail available, as well as a convenient means of reducing this sail easily and effectively when necessary. Stubby rigs are bad for many reasons, looks among them. A lot of the boats in today's charter fleets have cut-down rigs to make them "easier" to sail, but they look, and clearly are, ridiculous. Short masts are either the direct result of a racing rule (i.e. CCA boats), or are an ill-conceived attempt by some well-meaning designer or, more likely, production facility to make the boat "easier" to sail.

Weight is less slow than excess wetted surface. A full-keeled, slack-bilged boat may well have less wetted surface when loaded for cruising than one of the more modern beamy, no-bilge designs would when loaded with similar weight. Heavier, more traditionally-designed hulls tend to allow for far better weight-bearing capacity without reduction in performance, whereas modern lightweight hulls that are designed to perch atop the water's surface (for all intents and purposes) suffer badly when weighted down with the normal detritus of cruising. A true cruising boat must be able to carry the required weight without crushing the performance.

I'd rather have an easily-driven hull any day, rather than a design that requires massive amounts of effort to push through the water. Sailing well doesn't always mean the ultimate in speed; it's a more all-encompassing idea that incorporates a decent turn of speed, manageability of the sail plan and boat itself, reasonable ability to beat to windward in relative comfort, and more. There are plenty of cruising designs that meet these requirements, though they're rarely the most modern, raceboat-inspired designs that have taken over the general marketplace.
---------------------------------------------------
Forum Founder--No Longer Participating
feetup
Almost a Finish Carpenter
Posts: 99
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:35 am
Location: Ladysmith, Vancouver Island

Post by feetup »

I know this is an old thread, but for some reason i hadn't read it before.
Very lucid comments, Tim.
The topic brings to mind the Sharpies and Skipjacks of a century ago that appear to my modern eye desparately over powered. The Baltimore clippers too carried an enormous amount of canvas, with so much of it forward on the massive sprit that they look like they would have to be watched closely so as not to suffer a bad lee helm. Mind you they were not much more than privateers or smugglers that operated under the approving eye of a young government beneath the nose of the Brits. They needed to be fast. I can recall pictures of lobster and other gaff rigged working boats of that era with massive main sails and long sprits with very shallow draft and centerboards. They were work boats but as Bluenose has stated they make the modern cruiser look very much under canvased.
That also points toward the Nova Scotia and New England schooners that competed for the Fisherman's Cup. The Canadian Bluenose comes to mind (with pride since "I am Canadian".) This was a working boat for everyday of the year except those spent racing. Look at the picture on a Canaidian dime, now that's a lot of sail area.

Feetup
CharlieJ
Wood Whisperer
Posts: 649
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 7:42 pm
Location: South coast of Texas, Matagorda Bay

Post by CharlieJ »

one point to bear in mind about the sharpies and boats of that ilk- they were designed to carry LOTS of cargo in the form of either oysters fish or whatever, and get back to port fast, to get the best prices. The SA may well have been too much for an empty boat, but load that same sharpie with 2 tons of oysters and that SA is just fine.

Also remember- the east coast is known for light airs in the summer months. Sharpies usually had three ways to carry sail. All on two masts, move the main to a third mast step amidships and leave the mizzen home, or carry the mizzen in that step and leave the main home. PLus each sail could be reefed. Each set up gives the boat proportionally less sail area, depending on winds. So in the winter winds, they simply carried fewer masts.

I've built several sprit rigged boats, that have the additional mast step and am preparing to add one to our own 18 foot sprit rigged sharpie..

Oh- and a sharpie is a FAST boat, you betcha. Ours carries 108 square feet of sail on a 300 pound flat bottomed hull with a 4 foot beam on the bottom..
Post Reply