Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

66602Re: Oldshoe Review!

Expand Messages
  • William
    Aug 2, 2011
      I have to agree with Bruce on this point. The flat, transom bow on my Long Micro has never struck me as relevant to impeding headway or causing a broach (and I have never come close to broaching my LM). I have also had my LM running downwind at 8.2 knots (SOG) in waves at least 50 inches from trough to crest (the height at which I can no longer see the horizon from the bottom of the trough) and not come close to exceeding the speed of the waves rolling-in from astern.
      I guess it is possible to exceed the speed of the waves and bury the bow into a wave, but I have never done it running downwind. This speed far exceeds the theoretical hullspeed of the LM (5.6 knts?), but I notice no differences in tracking between 3 knots downwind or 6+ knots downwind.

      I don't doubt that people have broached their Oldshoes if they say they have. I don't think the flat bow is the cause. Were they really sailing faster than the waves (*raises eyebrows quizzically*)? I'd like to hear more.

      These box sharpies look funny, and many dock-side critics ascribe poor sailing qualities to these boats just by eyeballing them. These critics are misinformed but, like us all, they have keyboards and internet connections and their rumors and misinformation spread. I just want to point out that my experiences with my LM (which is bigger and heavier than an Oldshoe. This probably matters) have all been very positive when sailing at my limits. These things are well-mannered, predictable, tolerant of fools, stable, and they sail well. They do not pound sailing to windward and they alleged slapping and pounding at anchor is far overblown. Broaching has never struck me as a serious concern. I realize I sound like a zealot or defender of the box sharpie. I am.

      Bill, in Texas
      Long Micro Pugnacious

      --- In bolger@yahoogroups.com, BruceHallman <hallman@...> wrote:
      > On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 6:15 PM, daschultz2000
      > <daschultz8275@...> wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > --- In bolger@yahoogroups.com, BruceHallman <hallman@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > I believe that broaching is most often caused by a displacement hull
      > > > exceeding its hull speed. Perhaps what happened is that the hull
      > > > surfed down the face of one wave and gained too much speed?
      > > >
      > >
      > > Yes. That fits with the description of the situation. The writer described the boat heading down the face of the wave, the bow striking the next wave and stopping the boat, except the back of the boat kept coming, broaching the hull.
      > >
      > > Don
      > I am not sure that the bluntness of the transomed bow increases the
      > risk broaching due to its bluntness. When I look at designs intended
      > for bar crossing or inlet running, they all seem to have in common the
      > character of plenty of reserve buoyancy in the bow. This, I deduce,
      > is intended to allow the bow to float high upon encountering the
      > backside of a wave when surfing.
      > (Also, I see in the Inlet Running boats a converse, low reserve
      > buoyancy in the stern; which also would help the bow to float high
      > when encountering the backside of a wave.)
      > In other words, I don't think the goal in avoiding broaches is for the
      > bow to cut through the next wave, but rather it is for the bow to rise
      > up when it hits the backside of the next wave. I think it is
      > misguided to point to "the bow stopping the boat", and if anything a
      > transomed bow would have better reserve buoyancy characteristics than
      > a knife edge bow.
    • Show all 24 messages in this topic