[MHml] proa weight

[Rob Denney]

G'day,

The rig in the ww hull was considered, but as well as the structural problems, it added windage and weight.  Mostly though, it meant the boat was very prone to capsizing if caught aback.  While this is acceptable round the cans, it is no way to cross oceans.  

The single beam was also considered, but the ability to reach the rudder was more important.  If the boat was a little larger and sailed by more than one crew, then a single beam, and maybe the rig in the ww hull would be the way to go.

regards,

Rob
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: rob dalton 
  To: Multihulls at steamradio.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 9:25 AM
  Subject: [MHml] proa weight


  Having the rig in the leeward long hull and a short ww hull rather than an Atlantic configuration reduces the torque on the crossbeams which must significantly reduce total weight even though not maximising righting potential. I presume the possibility of a single central moncoque beam was considered. It makes sense to me except for being able to pack it up easily.
  Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  Alter your subscription details or unsubscribe at the bottom of this page:
  http://www.steamradio.com/mailman/listinfo/multihulls

  Multihulls mailing list      (Multihulls at steamradio.com)




------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition.
  Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.11.5/426 - Release Date: 8/23/2006
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://steamradio.com/pipermail/multihulls/attachments/20061108/65832f69/attachment.htm