When the Rapido 60 trimaran first appeared, I figured it was some kind of a joke. The styling recalled an F27 from 20 years ago. I teased that they owed Ian royalties. It’s beam overall was just over 38’, which some of mine, and most modern 40’ + trimarans, equal. My GS 60 beam overall, from 25 years ago, in E-glass, was 44.5’. Everybody knows that when you push a multi, wide is what keeps you right side up. So making it not wide had to be something to push onto the unsuspecting, right?
Almost all the pictures I saw of them had the crazy camouflage paint so it was never clear what was going on. I figured that they were not serious and didn’t think much more about them.
It was just pointed out to me that the R60s don’t have continuous mainstrength beams. Blew me away. Followers of this over the years have seen the importance of continuous fibers, fiber orientation, co-curing of mission-critical parts, not forcing composites into sharp turns…..
And here is one design that seems to ignore all that. What gives?
And that explains the narrow overall beam. That’s the only way to keep the loads down, besides throwing carbon at the problem.
Again, I have always declared that with enough carbon and enough money, one can have almost anything designed. This seems to be a prime example.
If we assume 24,000 lbs sailing weight, and a 12’ cantilever of the beam, then hit it with a shock load on one of the beams. The moment at the root will be something like a quarter million foot pounds. If the bury is 3’, then the load to resist will be some 80,000 lbs.
No wonder it is so heavy. Yes, heavy. 20,000 lbs. lightship. It is all carbon, right? That carbon has some 5 to 7 times the modulus of E-glass. Compare to my GS60 at 13,000 lbs., as designed, in mostly E-glass.
Main point. You can’t beat a continuous D section for the most beam strength and stiffness, the least weight, and least cost to build.
And again, all boats inhabit a place on a continuum between a habitat and a vehicle.
The R60 seems a bit confused. All the carbon tells me vehicle, but chopping up the lightest, strongest possible connecting beams to get more cabin space is right back to a 1960s Horstman; habitat.
None the less, I’m sure they will sell a lot of them. The owners can “Hey baby, I got a carbon boat.”
I prefer direct, simple solutions to magical ones.
One of my demountable tube/wire trimarans down under. Been so long since I grabbed the picture that I forget who builder is. Chime in here? Anyone?
Developed ply/epoxy. Looks great.
Will be out of the office for a few days. Will have phone and laptop with me though.
Part of what I am doing on the lunar lander dwelling project; building a tiny house using boat construction, is to test the limits of many techniques and products. I took the VHB tape past its limit.
I tried to use it to attach an acrylic shower door without any fasteners; a worthy goal.
While the VHB tape is amazingly strong, it has limits. Its weakness as I understand it, is long duration loading, while depending on peel strength. The shower door provided that. It’s tepid resisting the energy of initiation, followed by energy of propagation, made it fail.
In the picture, the VHB tape attaches both the hinge and the angle brackets. Both failed after a while.
On a window, peel strength would not even enter into it. I’m always curious about where the real world limits are.
Shorthanded sailing for both racing and cruising.
Demountable and able to fit into a tallboy container.
This design is the latest update to a design that I did several years ago for Phil Steggall.
It also has several features that I developed while sailing my own F40 Geko. First of these is the addition of an actual cabin from main hull flare. Any time a few people come aboard for a sail, their gear has to go somewhere, The 7 foot wide cabin also allows a canopy to hide under in bad weather. On the much narrower Geko, that space was taken up by winches.
The outboard is mounted beside the cockpit instead of back on the transom. When shorthanding having the motor right there without leaving the cockpit is important. On the Geko an 8 hp outboard would push it to 7 knots in chop and once did 11 knots on flat water.
It has a single board in the main hull. Vertical and aft of the mast a bit. In Marchaj we find that a vertical board has the most even stall characteristics and also less deflection for the span. Fully down, the board is a couple of feet below the cabin top. Downwind the boom can be lifted a couple of feet to reduce board draft. I don’t understand the trimarans that suffer the inefficiency of swept boards.
Board down, the draft is something like 10 feet.
As usual it has 200% buoyancy amas.
Presently the design has ama rudders.
Foils were not chosen as they work best with larger crews.
Construction is strip foam and unidirectional e-glass for the main hull. The amas could be the same or even a combination of developed plywood and carbon fiber.
Beams are core with carbon fiber.
Geometry is virtually square with the width almost a much as the length overall. Doesn’t that make it wider than a Rapido 60?