Are too many dinghies too short?
Printed From: Yachts and Yachting Online
Category: Dinghy classes
Forum Name: Dinghy development
Forum Discription: The latest moves in the dinghy market
URL: http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=10759
Printed Date: 17 Jul 25 at 4:18pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.665y - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Are too many dinghies too short?
Posted By: rb_stretch
Subject: Are too many dinghies too short?
Date Posted: 11 Mar 13 at 2:09pm
|
I always thought that shorter dinghies are much more weight sensitive than longer ones, because you have less waterline length to absorb the differences in displacement. What surprises me is that given the population as a whole is getting bigger and heavier, why is it dinghies seem to be getting shorter? Back in time there were lots of new design "long" dinghies FD (20 feet), 505s (16+), Ospey (17+), Javelin (17+), IC (17), Fireball (16+) and even single handers like the Contender (16+). Nowadays you almost never see new designs that are "long", which means if you are a heavy helm your choice is very limited. I know that was the issue I was facing when looking to get a doublehander. So why are we restricting the potential audience of sailors by sticking to short boats, when longer boats are better at taking differences in weight? I can only think of price... |
Replies:
Posted By: tgruitt
Date Posted: 11 Mar 13 at 2:28pm
|
and they're more fun....(apart from 18 footers, they're long and fun!) ------------- Needs to sail more... |
Posted By: Do Different
Date Posted: 11 Mar 13 at 2:31pm
|
I think so to, I'm not technically qualified but let's not allow that to get in way of an opinion. I put it down in some measure to the introduction of asymmetric kite and the quest for early planing and off-wind drag race style thrills. Horses for courses I guess, literally in fact but I'm old and firmly into long boats that will go upwind in both planing and displacement mode well. I guess the long boats suffer a little in weight and wetted area terms but in my book the compromise has shifted a little to far. Maybe on flat water the short boats work better but in a sea punching a tide I'd take another 3ft of hull. BTW Had a Laser 14ft+, Buzz 14ft (proportionally big kite), now 17ft+ and enjoying it most of all and on every point of sail.
|
Posted By: Jack Sparrow
Date Posted: 11 Mar 13 at 3:44pm
and they are lighter ( to trolley, car top ), they fit in your garage ( if you want to make one at home or repair ) take up less space in the dinghy park and use less materials when being built, thus cheaper. ------------- http://www.uk3-7class.org/index.html" rel="nofollow - Farr 3.7 Class Website https://www.facebook.com/groups/1092602470772759/" rel="nofollow - Farr 3.7 Building - Facebook Group |
Posted By: pondmonkey
Date Posted: 11 Mar 13 at 4:34pm
yep... and if all else fails, you can stick a FO big gantry off the back anyway. ------------- |
Posted By: tgruitt
Date Posted: 11 Mar 13 at 4:41pm
You don't need all that hull anyway, gantries and bowsprits ahoy! ------------- Needs to sail more... |
Posted By: pondmonkey
Date Posted: 11 Mar 13 at 4:50pm
or slow, tactical racing in Solos and Mirrors... either way, 12ft-ish is a winner when it comes to optimum dinghy LWL  ------------- |
Posted By: RS400atC
Date Posted: 11 Mar 13 at 5:13pm
|
For every long boat from the classic era, there are probably several short ones, all those Herons, Gulls, 11pluses, it's the long ones that have stood the test of time best perhaps? My personal view is that length is the easiest way to increase performance in light air, if you can keep the weight down. But the penalty is that a long boat will carry heavy crews with no penalty and they will be faster. So if you want to have a class with racing over a range of crew weight, you need the boat to be short enough that it punishes the heavy people just enough to offset their power advantage. At my weight, the RS400 could do with being longer (or a lot lighter) in sub-planing conditions, but it seems to deliver good racing over a range of crew weights, provided the course is not full of fetches and kite-stretching exercises. I think in anything other than flat water, upwind a fine angle to the bow is key, which basicallly means a long boat for a given volume, and/or the max beam a long way back. |
Posted By: MerlinMags
Date Posted: 11 Mar 13 at 5:31pm
The bigger people, these days, are the sort of people who don't do sports! I wonder if sailors on average have got lighter and fitter over the years? My view: 14ft is perfection. Why would you need a boat of any other length? Although with more foiling classes, the length of the hull might become irrelevant.
|
Posted By: SoggyBadger
Date Posted: 11 Mar 13 at 5:36pm
Or perhaps not. Averaged out since the Millenium there have been about 30 new Herons registered per year. I believe that Hartleys are aiming to build about 20 Gulls per year. Don't know about the Mirror but I can't imagine it being less. The 11 plus was a sweet little boat but never caught on in a big way. And not all the longer designs prospered e.g., Jollyboat. ------------- Best wishes from deep in the woods SB |
Posted By: rb_stretch
Date Posted: 11 Mar 13 at 5:50pm
My own view is that bigger people get pushed into keelboats. I know that was where I went for racing until I couldn't justify the travel time and got a Phantom as one of the few dinghies that does cater for heavy helms. Anyway, my point really was that longer dinghies seem more versatile in catering for different weights. I'm not sure I buy the fact that longer boats need heavier crew - surely that is much more to do with the power of the rig. |
Posted By: RS400atC
Date Posted: 11 Mar 13 at 6:17pm
It's not that a longer boat needs more weight, keep the weight the same keep the same rig but make the boat longer and a crew of given weight will be faster, until the air drag of the hull becomes significant. But unless the boat is undercanvassed, a longer boat that will carry weight better will benefit a heavier crew much more of the time. If you take that too far, particularly in a non-trapeze or single trapeze boat, you have to be heavy to win and you have excluded a vast chunk of the market. A class where the heaviest crew wins as soon as its over 10 knots would not have a great future as a one design, but it might suit a lot of people for PY racing. Of course longer boats tend to get created with bigger rigs. Of course a shorter boat will generally tack quicker and gives more feedback and impression of speed, so may be more practical and more fun. Looking back at the old days is a bit of a moving target, are we talking about pre-war (lots of local 12ft classes) 50's 70's 90's? |
Posted By: Do Different
Date Posted: 11 Mar 13 at 6:22pm
| Mike Arnold's Alto has ticked a lot of the right boxes for a versatile 16ft+ two man dinghy. By how much has the Icon stretched it's 14ft lineage? |
Posted By: pondmonkey
Date Posted: 11 Mar 13 at 6:23pm
I'd say we're bigger on average, 'average' being of adult active participants paying with their own cash that is. I have an old 1980s Douglas Gill spray suit - off ebay for a comedy retro sailing suit one day. size XL which normally fit in 21stC Gill- but it's way too tight and short in both arm and leg. I will have to lose weight and have leg length reduction surgery to realise the comic genius of this acquisition... ------------- |
Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 11 Mar 13 at 8:37pm
|
Yes, too many boats are too short. More and more folks are taller than 6 feet, so they are on the "heavy" side of the spectrum, no matter how fit/skinny/... they are. For example too few double handers can carry two tall guys, who have no chance to get their combined crew weight below 160 kgs, and rather will weigh in at 180 kgs, comfortably. At least I am very happy that the RS800 is 16' as opposed to the usual 14', I do not need any extensions to stick out at the front and back just to make up for a lack in hull length :-) And a 505 would not be what it is at 14', too... |
Posted By: blaze720
Date Posted: 11 Mar 13 at 8:52pm
|
By how much has the Icon stretched it's 14ft lineage? .... well to about 14' 10" in old money with a very near vertical bow as you ask. It is a good compromise and was needed to inject a bit more weight carrying capability into the hull compared to the NS 14 'pre-cursers' (so both longer/wider) .. which makes it about the same length as a Tasar in fact. It certainly keeps the Icon moving better in lighter stuff as well as in proper wind. We reckon the range of ideal crew weight to be 140-175kg but that those a few kg either side of this range should stiill find things competitive. Mike L. |
Posted By: Chris 249
Date Posted: 12 Mar 13 at 11:17am
|
As a comparison, it seems that British dinghies may have less LOA variation, if we look at the popular classes. There's none of the very popular 17-19' 3-person classes that one sees in the USA or Australia, for example, in the form of Lightnings, Thistles, Flying Scots, Sharpies and 16 Foot Skiffs*. As I understand it this is partly because the UK traditionally had smaller cars and garages (which is something Jack Holt noted) and perhaps because you often sail on smaller waterways. This was noted by people like COnrad Gulcher and Westell many years ago when they created the 505 and FD as a blend of long Euro boats and shorter British boats. On the other hand, the Yanks also have a fondless for bizarrely small boats in the form of adults sailing 8' El Toros and Sabot and even smaller Frosties, whereas down here we may have a disproportionate number of adults sailing Mirrors, 125s and Herons and other 11-12' two-handers. It was noticeable in the women's skiff thread that the Brits seemed to place a higher value on a boat being short and sensitive than sailors from other areas may. It's also noticeable (from personal experience and the writings of many experts) that being highly sensitive was seen as an inherent virtue whereas from an outsider's perspective, it's nothing more than a perfectly understandable national quirk.  D'oh, well a 16 is 16 feet LOA but if one takes into consideration rig size etc it's much bigger than a Fireball or similar, and it is a three-handers. You get the drift!
|
Posted By: tick
Date Posted: 12 Mar 13 at 11:43am
| I always think Supernova goes well because of its length. It has the mast well back and a long fine entry. It also suits a variation of weight. Not that much canvas either. |
Posted By: ex laser
Date Posted: 12 Mar 13 at 3:08pm
as far as i am concerned, as a british moth sailor, no boat needs to be longer than 11 feet!!!! ( and we have some large boned people in the class )------------- |
Posted By: Medway Maniac
Date Posted: 12 Mar 13 at 5:32pm
Yes, as I started reading this thread I was thinking of how the Alto has really caught on at WSC with people who are too big for 400's and 800's. The scow/tunnel-hulled Intl Moth was another boat screaming out for more length. I'd love a 15 foot version. Jack Sparrow has listed reasons for keeping boats short; individuals may or not consider each of those to be an important consideration. One of his reasons I'd maybe question (while acknowledging that he should, as a builder haver the answer) is that length adds significantly to the weight. I'd have thought that once you had the structure in place to take the rig and centreboard loads, you could tack on extra length for relatively little extra weight - how much does a section of hull at bow or stern weigh? Not much so far as I can see. ------------- http://www.wilsoniansc.org.uk" rel="nofollow - Wilsonian SC http://www.3000class.org.uk" rel="nofollow - 3000 Class |
Posted By: RS400atC
Date Posted: 12 Mar 13 at 6:19pm
|
Adding length cheaply would add weight. But lots of boats could be built longer without weighing any more, with perhaps modest use of better material? A longer boat will put more stress on the hull when one end is out of the water or whatever. Modern foam sandwich hulls probably have plenty of stiffness to cope, where a single skin grp or ply hull might not. Isn't a 59er quite long? Does that suggest making a long boat is not always the way to go? I suppose I'm biased toward longer boats having spent some time sailing yachts from A to B, length is good in that regime. |
Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 12 Mar 13 at 7:47pm
|
The X1 is long and slim, and very, very light. Seems it carries weight well, too. I keep on doodling 15' double ended singlehanders, where you get the long W/L length, but keep the weight out of the ends. Of course, the Int Canoe has been doing this successfully at 17' for eons! ------------- Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686 |
Posted By: MerlinMags
Date Posted: 13 Mar 13 at 11:52am
|
If anyone is truly interested, I can make a graph of how many classes appear in each length bracket, and compare today's list against that of 1960. I'd need help filling in the hull lengths our database is missing though. I did something similar a while back, graphing length against speed, and then chuckling over the extreme outlying points:  http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/classes/length_versus_speed.asp - http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/classes/length_versus_speed.asp Yes, I am a bit of a nerd for this stuff. But it never feels like it becasue my brother has a PhD in stats.
|