[MHml] 70 foot cats!!!

[roy mills]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave Culp" <dave at kiteship.com>
To: "Informed discussion of multihull issues" <multihulls at steamradio.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007 7:39 AM
Subject: Re: [MHml] 70 foot cats!!!


> Speaking of comparisons, I think I'd need to ask myself just exactly
> what this class of race boats offers, significantly different from
> ORMA 60s. OK, they're 10' longer. Are they faster? (ORMA best day's
> speed what, 670 miles?) Are they cheaper? Are they more exciting to
> watch? Are they faster in very light conditions? Very heavy
> conditions? Can they be raced both as single handers, and as crewed
> boats? Are they suitable for offshore? If they're just day racing
> cats, how are they superior to the boats already raced on lakes?
>
> I'm not saying the answers to these questions are all going to be
> negative, but I do think they'll need to be answered--very
> positively--before such a class can gain traction.

        Some of these are the questions that came to my mind when I first 
read about the proposed tour.. The issue of single handing did not arise 
because it was not contemplated in the format. The question of cost seems to 
have been answered. I still wonder if it was neccessary to go to 70 foot 
cats when the Volvo EX 40's seemed to have "broken the ice as it were". 
However these are canny people, way out of my league, so I will await with a 
lot of interest whatever happens next. Hopefully it will further advance the 
state of the multihull art and the acceptance by more people that Multis are 
the way to go for performance, the comfort issue seems to be already well 
advanced. Still not easy to get them both together though.:^(.

>
> Dave
>
> On 2/9/07, roy mills <rsirfj at shaw.ca> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Bill Gibbs
>> To: 'Informed discussion of multihull issues'
>> Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 11:42 AM
>> Subject: Re: [MHml] 70 foot cats!!!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sheer size?  Only length probably.  A 60x60 tri is a deck area of 3600 
>> sq.
>> ft.  A 70x35 (?)  cat is only 2450 sq. ft.  I'd argue the tri is a bigger
>> boat.  The cat is the longer boat.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bill
>>
>> Afterburner
>>
>>         I think not. If you calculate deck area only, ignoring all 
>> netting
>> and empty spaces the cat may be bigger, certainlycloser than your
>> calculation. Do we know the sail area? That may show us which are truly 
>> the
>> larger vessel.  They have certainly started off at an expensive level.
>>
>>
>>
>>     Roy Mills
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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)
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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)
>
>