Trimaran - Especially Searunner - Owners

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by owly

Propane weight including the tank is double the actual fuel weight typically. Alternatives are limited. Personally I like Coleman Fuel or "white gas"........ I haven 't seen the latter since the mid 70's. Unleaded is NOT the same thing, however ordinary "mo gas" can be distilled rather easily. I once did it years ago, outraged about the cost of Coleman Fuel........ which is naphlene mostly. Naptha is a common thinner which is available in many places where they sell paint. Container weight is a non issue as it is a liquid. I mentioned this earlier.
I'm interested in dehydrated water......... it weighs nothing at all..... just add water to reconstitute. Much lighter than carrying water in it's liquid form I'm told

H.W.

I want in on the dehydrated water.

[Randy]

Short handed or solo an auto helm seems to be a "must have" is it ? I don't rate wind vane steering at all. And what is its energy consumption and Lithium battery requirement ?
I had the "Jim Brown" windvane and it worked flawlessly in all but <5kt. Others have had issues with reliability and I think it has to do with the way it was set up. I wouldn't trust autopilots in the sailboat versions. They draw tons of electricity and are almost always underpowered so they break.

[Cavalier MK2]

The low energy way to work a auto pilot is for it to turn a tab like the wind vane for the servo effect. On boats with balanced spade rudders there is much less steering effort so a direct connect is fine but Searunners have that outboard skeg though Jim put a balanced kick up on Scrimshaw eventually.

I have a really well made Searunner vane and gear to try but have been reading all the books lately. One book mentions good success with a horizontal vane steering the tiller on a spade without needing a tab on a hotter Piver so I'll try that first.

[owly]

Originally Posted by Cavalier MK2

The low energy way to work a auto pilot is for it to turn a tab like the wind vane for the servo effect. On boats with balanced spade rudders there is much less steering effort so a direct connect is fine but Searunners have that outboard skeg though Jim put a balanced kick up on Scrimshaw eventually.

I have a really well made Searunner vane and gear to try but have been reading all the books lately. One book mentions good success with a horizontal vane steering the tiller on a spade without needing a tab on a hotter Piver so I'll try that first.

There is no question that the horizontal axis vane is more positive and more powerful. All it lacks is the utter simplicity of the vertical axis vane, which in theory at least could be mounted right to the top of the rudder post of a well balanced airfoil shaped rudder for the ultimate in simplicity. The horizontal vane needs some mechanism to change the axis of rotation..... which could be pretty simple. There are a number of plans on line, and countless detail photos of existing systems. My ideal rudder would be transom mounted, and be an airfoil shape...... I use the term "airfoil" because "hydrofoil", and just "foil" which is the proper term, have been usurped in most people's minds at least as a lifting device....... vertical lifting. In truth any lifting device, weather it be something that lifts the boat out of the water, provides horizontal forces such as a rudder, or provides downward forces, is a hydrofoil. This rudder would high aspect ratio (narrow for it's length), extending down into water well below the surface. It would be designed to kick up if it struck something, and the position of the rudder in relation to it's pivot axis would be variable....... If it has a king pin about which it pivots upward in a "strike", there is no reason why the down position cannot be adjustable. The idea being that the further forward you have the bottom end of the rudder when it is down, the greater the "balance" area. For self steering it might be quite far forward for an almost neutral balance. For manual helming where feedback is desired, it can be kicked aft more to give feel. Another of my mad ideas............ H.W.

[Cavalier MK2]

I'm a few steps ahead. My rudder gets the endplate effect and still kicks up. Even the stock spade is decent.

[Cavalier MK2]

A word of caution for the boatless. These boats tend to draw the curiously behaving curious in kayaks. For those that value serenity it can be annoying as these fantastic creatures have often developed fantastic fantasies concerning your craft. Just send them to Stephen/Multihuller who usually has extras he is trying to sell.

[Redreuben]

HW, kicking foils forward also works towards preventing ventilation.
Another win.

[Buzzman]

The real benefit of lithium over acid is the weight saving.

At worst you save a minimum of 12.5kg.

That's a LOT of freeze dried food on longer passages.

And unlimited capacity for dehydrated water!!

[snort]

Dehydrated water is a passing fad.
Extremely low on calories though it is, and never filling.

[Buzzman]

Personally, I agree with others who argued against the use of a watermaker to reduce the weight of water required to be carried on passages.

You only need a watermaker if you have a need for large quantities of water for bathing. Especially for things like washing long hair.

The often quoted "1 gallon per day" of water assumes a fairly 'normal' bathing regime, for example.

Simply wiping down with a damp cloth (rather than using a shower, whether fixed or hand held) can dramatically reduce the necessity for excess water.

I normally manage on less than 2L per day - for drinking and cooking (and the occasional wipe down), so a 30 day passage would only require 60L.

So 3 jerrycans (jerryjugs) would suffice. Approx 60kgs of water.

I can't remember where I read it, but one earlier voyager I recall stating that all crew cut their hair to a military buzzcut prior to long passages to reduce the need for washing hair, and it slowly grew out over the passage.

It also depends heavily on the crew numbers. Solo, I can manage on 60L, but two-up that's 120L - double the weight. That 60kg is a *lot* of food.

But the smallest of the most-effective desalinators - Katadyn's Survivor 06 manual model, is around $1200.

And this produces about a litre of water every hour of pumping. So is enough for "suvival mode" [ie: in a liferaft] but not enough for regular use. They even recommend it only for 'occasional' use [ie: not regular ongoing use - emergencies only]

You have to step up to the Survivor 35 manual model at $2400 that produces 4.5L per hour of continous pumping. Or enough for two for a day.

The electric version of it is the 12-VDC PowerSurvivor 40E at $4000 that produces approx 15L per hour.

BUT, and this is the big but, (big butt??), whichever way you choose will be down to your personal preferences, and especially can depend on the crew's needs.

Imagine telling your First Mate that she cannot wash her long hair for a month.

Yeah, right....

So if you are a "normal" couple, it might just be worth that extra investment to have *water certainty* from an electric watermaker (with jerry jug emergency back up), and the necessary additional energy production and storage capacity necessary to run the watermaker for an hour or two each day.

But it would *definitely* free up a lot of potential cruisng displacement to have a watermaker rather than liquid water in tanks or jugs. Especially for a family on a smaller vessel With reduced cargo capacity for large tanks of liquid water (much better than packets of that dehydrated stuff!)

And on a multihull, especially a lightweight cruising multi, and especially a smaller vessel like a 31' Searunner (or my in-build 24'), that might make the difference between the ability to *comfortably* make longer passages without being utterly reliant on fickle rainfall.

BUT, having said that, the three man crew of the capsized Kiwi tri, Rose Noelle, survived for four months on what they captured from a jury-rigged rainwater collection system.

So it *IS* possible to rely on it - just not very desirable.

YMMV

[Cavalier MK2]

Darn it Buzzman, You mean I can't use the haircut scene out of Water World for a training film?! If you keep this sort of thing up you'll be counseling us on sensitivity next. I suppose you have thoughts about curtains too?

Yes, I did the math on this sort of thing long ago and wondered where Owly was getting his 12 gallons an hour from. This is why my Nicol figures tend to be low, the fun factor.....

[owly]

Let me clarify myself.... again.... I'm NOT advocating for a commercially manufactured electric water maker, though in one post I suggested it as a way to "bank energy". Commercial watermakers are quite expensive as you pointed out.... and most of us already knew. However they are in fact quite simple machines in principle. Every commercial unit calls for a specific filter sold only by the manufacturer.... of course at a nice premium. They are fairly complex devices, designed to operate with little user intervention, far more complex than is really necessary for merely pushing high pressure water through an RO filter, and of course being able to backflush with fresh water. Decent sized desalination filters are not terribly expensive, and there are a number of good articles on building your own. Probably the most expensive part would be the stainless steel housing for the filter, and the fittings & valves. The pumps used are in effect no different from a pressure washer pump. What I really am advocating is a pedal powered or "oarboard" powered pump for exercise while making quality pure water. The watermaker is a purifier like RO, which means that while at anchor in Guatamala or Long Beach, you are not dependent on questionable or unpalatable local water. Obviously you don't want to feed it harbor water, but it's not difficult to go a few miles offshore once in awhile..... it is a sailboat after all. I would assume that many of us here, like myself are do-it-yourselfer's, and pretty mechanically capable. We don't necessarily need slick factory made stuff, or this wouldn't be about Searunners. H.W.

Originally Posted by Buzzman

Personally, I agree with others who argued against the use of a watermaker to reduce the weight of water required to be carried on passages.

You only need a watermaker if you have a need for large quantities of water for bathing. Especially for things like washing long hair.

The often quoted &quot;1 gallon per day&quot; of water assumes a fairly 'normal' bathing regime, for example.

Simply wiping down with a damp cloth (rather than using a shower, whether fixed or hand held) can dramatically reduce the necessity for excess water.

I normally manage on less than 2L per day - for drinking and cooking (and the occasional wipe down), so a 30 day passage would only require 60L.

So 3 jerrycans (jerryjugs) would suffice. Approx 60kgs of water.

I can't remember where I read it, but one earlier voyager I recall stating that all crew cut their hair to a military buzzcut prior to long passages to reduce the need for washing hair, and it slowly grew out over the passage.

It also depends heavily on the crew numbers. Solo, I can manage on 60L, but two-up that's 120L - double the weight. That 60kg is a *lot* of food.

But the smallest of the most-effective desalinators - Katadyn's Survivor 06 manual model, is around $1200.

And this produces about a litre of water every hour of pumping. So is enough for &quot;suvival mode&quot; [ie: in a liferaft] but not enough for regular use. They even recommend it only for 'occasional' use [ie: not regular ongoing use - emergencies only]

You have to step up to the Survivor 35 manual model at $2400 that produces 4.5L per hour of continous pumping. Or enough for two for a day.

The electric version of it is the 12-VDC PowerSurvivor 40E at $4000 that produces approx 15L per hour.

BUT, and this is the big but, (big butt??), whichever way you choose will be down to your personal preferences, and especially can depend on the crew's needs.

Imagine telling your First Mate that she cannot wash her long hair for a month.

Yeah, right....

So if you are a &quot;normal&quot; couple, it might just be worth that extra investment to have *water certainty* from an electric watermaker (with jerry jug emergency back up), and the necessary additional energy production and storage capacity necessary to run the watermaker for an hour or two each day.

But it would *definitely* free up a lot of potential cruisng displacement to have a watermaker rather than liquid water in tanks or jugs. Especially for a family on a smaller vessel With reduced cargo capacity for large tanks of liquid water (much better than packets of that dehydrated stuff!)

And on a multihull, especially a lightweight cruising multi, and especially a smaller vessel like a 31' Searunner (or my in-build 24'), that might make the difference between the ability to *comfortably* make longer passages without being utterly reliant on fickle rainfall.

BUT, having said that, the three man crew of the capsized Kiwi tri, Rose Noelle, survived for four months on what they captured from a jury-rigged rainwater collection system.

So it *IS* possible to rely on it - just not very desirable.

YMMV

[owly]

Let me do the math again and see where I went wrong. Horsepower = (PSI * GPM) / 1710 You can find that formula anywhere. I use it all the time. 12 gallons per hour = 2/10 of a gallon per minute times 1000 PSI = 200 200 / 1710 = .1169 As the average person is said to be able to put out 1/10 horsepower continuously for long periods of time, my 12 gallon figure was optimistic, but I was talking about a workout, not a walk in the park. Of course the filter must be able to pass that amount of water at that rate for it to work. If the filter is of inadequate size, the pressure will rise well about 1000 psi. 12 gallons per hour is completely possible, but most of us go for the 15 minute workout, which could easily yield 3 gallons each workout. Still a generous amount of water. H.W.

Originally Posted by Cavalier MK2

Darn it Buzzman, You mean I can't use the haircut scene out of Water World for a training film?! If you keep this sort of thing up you'll be counseling us on sensitivity next. I suppose you have thoughts about curtains too?

Yes, I did the math on this sort of thing long ago and wondered where Owly was getting his 12 gallons an hour from. This is why my Nicol figures tend to be low, the fun factor.....

[Cavalier MK2]

I grew up sailing and take some things for granted but there are many people new to cruising who can only relate to their land experiences. Buzz's post about the mutiny of long haired people not getting their daily wash is a good snapshot of the current sales picture. You need that bigger cat and watermaker to keep the stream flowing on passage..

What you are supposed to do is wash your hair/shower etc...dishes, in salt water and use just a small amount of fresh to rinse. This sort of thing used to be in old cruising books before the web told the world about the bigger expensive ways of sailing with links to the sales sites.

Like most things people tend to over purpose their boats too. Having a deep sea hauler when 98.5 % of your sailing will be coastal or inshore is a excellent example. Going this route it is easy to wind up with a slow boat that is actually less fun to sail and use.

A better idea is to accept that on the passage you'll be roughing it making a few sacrifices on the way to the promised land. Heavy items like those bikes, shore clothes and even supply caches can be shipped ahead to await their onboard role in the cruising grounds. This can let you take those extra provisions and water in a smaller cruising boat. Maybe an extra crew needs a ticket because they spend sea passages over the rail heaving but love the island hopping.

If those commercial watermakers and lithium power setups are added up you are well over $10,000 in infrastructure. That money could go to a bigger boat instead. Old school thinking but it avoids those student loans.....

[Cavalier MK2]

Originally Posted by owly

Let me do the math again and see where I went wrong. Horsepower = (PSI * GPM) / 1710 You can find that formula anywhere. I use it all the time. 12 gallons per hour = 2/10 of a gallon per minute times 1000 PSI = 200 200 / 1710 = .1169 As the average person is said to be able to put out 1/10 horsepower continuously for long periods of time, my 12 gallon figure was optimistic, but I was talking about a workout, not a walk in the park. Of course the filter must be able to pass that amount of water at that rate for it to work. If the filter is of inadequate size, the pressure will rise well about 1000 psi. 12 gallons per hour is completely possible, but most of us go for the 15 minute workout, which could easily yield 3 gallons each workout. Still a generous amount of water. H.W.

The X factor is the resistance imparted by the filter membrane as well as the size of the housing More data is needed there to give an estimate of output. For sure the workout looks appealing. Bob Beggs raced a Wharram Tiki 26 in the solo trans Atlantic race and took the conventional hand lifeboat water maker. It lasted the distance and he enjoyed the exercise. Upper body seems to get enough to do but keeping the legs in shape is what I'd look at.