Re: oar steering for a sailboat - like PCB's Cold Water Sailboard?
I've seen one picture of a Jinni online, so I've no notion as to how
similar it may be in hull form. But, yes, I was thinking of keeping
the Sailboard's hull and sail rig, but would think about how changing
the oar-rudder setup would affect the lateral resistance. I also
dislike daggerboards. Where I putter in boats, there
are numerous unmarked rock bars and ledges. Leeboards work well in
those rocks,
and I was attracted to the 'oar-rudder', as I believe it would be
more crunch-proof than even a kick-up rudder. Unshipping the rudder
(oar)to row would eliminate another pet peeve - having to lash the
tiller or pull up the rudder blade when starting to row.
I said that leeboards work well - I should have said kick up
leeboards. I put a makeshift sail rig on a 17' Grumman at the start
of the summer, and the leeboard and rudder are both on the starboard
side - parallel to the canoe's centerline.
There's a handle (1"x2"x16") at right angles to the long axis of the
leeboard pointing aft. Using that handle, I can rake the CLR either
fore or aft, steering without touching either tiller or sheet.
Depending on wind and load the canoe could get stuck in irons. Moving
the board foreward by pushing down on the handle as a tack starts
eliminates that problem. It's a tinkerer's learning tool, and I've
grown fond of it, so will probably try to incorporate it on my next
boat.
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "graeme19121984" <graeme19121984@y...>
wrote:
similar it may be in hull form. But, yes, I was thinking of keeping
the Sailboard's hull and sail rig, but would think about how changing
the oar-rudder setup would affect the lateral resistance. I also
dislike daggerboards. Where I putter in boats, there
are numerous unmarked rock bars and ledges. Leeboards work well in
those rocks,
and I was attracted to the 'oar-rudder', as I believe it would be
more crunch-proof than even a kick-up rudder. Unshipping the rudder
(oar)to row would eliminate another pet peeve - having to lash the
tiller or pull up the rudder blade when starting to row.
I said that leeboards work well - I should have said kick up
leeboards. I put a makeshift sail rig on a 17' Grumman at the start
of the summer, and the leeboard and rudder are both on the starboard
side - parallel to the canoe's centerline.
There's a handle (1"x2"x16") at right angles to the long axis of the
leeboard pointing aft. Using that handle, I can rake the CLR either
fore or aft, steering without touching either tiller or sheet.
Depending on wind and load the canoe could get stuck in irons. Moving
the board foreward by pushing down on the handle as a tack starts
eliminates that problem. It's a tinkerer's learning tool, and I've
grown fond of it, so will probably try to incorporate it on my next
boat.
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "graeme19121984" <graeme19121984@y...>
wrote:
> Hi Gordy, I haven't got the plans for "Jinni", but I think thisplan
> of yours would be very similar. Will you keep the same sail,bottom,
> and daggerboard?freeflooding
> Graeme
>
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "don_gordy_gordon"
> <don_gordy_gordon@y...> wrote:
> > I have a brain cramp understanding the hydrodynamics of using an
> oar
> > rotated about its long axis as opposed to a rudder. (I have a
> similar
> > problem with the variations of yulohs, but that's another story!)
> > Regardless, if a rotating, long, shallow foil works, why isn't it
> > used in more designs?
> > What led to this question is that I was thinking of using the CWS
> > hull, but air-boxing in the ends, adding centerline narrow
> hatches ,
> > and leaving the center either open or with very narrow sitting-
> width
> > decks - exactly the opposite of what Phil did.
> >
> > I know the dangers of changing the designers plans, but in this
> case
> > the hull form, scantlings, sail rig, etc. would be unchanged.
> > Instead of having the oar going through a hole in the
> > transom stern, its fulcrum would need to be raised to the top of
> the
> > stern airbox. Alternatively, it would be simple enough to add a
> > conventional transom mounted rudder, but if an oar works, and
> works
> > well, why not use a piece of equipment that I would be carrying
> > anyway for a dual purpose? After all, if I broke the 'oar-rudder'
> I'd
> > always have a spare handy.
> >
> > Thoughts, comments?
> >
> > Gordy
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Howard Stephenson"
<stephensonhw@a...>
wrote:
Howard.....maybe I wouldn't be that good afterall,as coxswain,that
is :-)
Sincerely,
Peter Lenihan,who has been oogling and fondling Windermere perhaps a
wee bit too much and really should try to get out a bit more often
for
some social integration,with the fairer of our species......arrrrgh
matey!
<stephensonhw@a...>
wrote:
> Yes, he has a good view of the oncoming waves, doesn't he?Waves?.....WAVES?!! Jesus H.Christ, I've just noticed them now
Howard.....maybe I wouldn't be that good afterall,as coxswain,that
is :-)
Sincerely,
Peter Lenihan,who has been oogling and fondling Windermere perhaps a
wee bit too much and really should try to get out a bit more often
for
some social integration,with the fairer of our species......arrrrgh
matey!
Hi Gordy, I haven't got the plans for "Jinni", but I think this plan
of yours would be very similar. Will you keep the same sail, bottom,
and daggerboard?
Graeme
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "don_gordy_gordon"
<don_gordy_gordon@y...> wrote:
of yours would be very similar. Will you keep the same sail, bottom,
and daggerboard?
Graeme
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "don_gordy_gordon"
<don_gordy_gordon@y...> wrote:
> I have a brain cramp understanding the hydrodynamics of using anoar
> rotated about its long axis as opposed to a rudder. (I have asimilar
> problem with the variations of yulohs, but that's another story!)hatches ,
> Regardless, if a rotating, long, shallow foil works, why isn't it
> used in more designs?
> What led to this question is that I was thinking of using the CWS
> hull, but air-boxing in the ends, adding centerline narrow
> and leaving the center either open or with very narrow sitting-width
> decks - exactly the opposite of what Phil did.case
>
> I know the dangers of changing the designers plans, but in this
> the hull form, scantlings, sail rig, etc. would be unchanged.the
> Instead of having the oar going through a hole in the freeflooding
> transom stern, its fulcrum would need to be raised to the top of
> stern airbox. Alternatively, it would be simple enough to add aworks
> conventional transom mounted rudder, but if an oar works, and
> well, why not use a piece of equipment that I would be carryingI'd
> anyway for a dual purpose? After all, if I broke the 'oar-rudder'
> always have a spare handy.
>
> Thoughts, comments?
>
> Gordy
Yes, he has a good view of the oncoming waves, doesn't he?
Howard
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Lenihan" <peterlenihan@h...>
wrote:
Howard
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Lenihan" <peterlenihan@h...>
wrote:
> > See:
> >
> >http://bhslsc.midcoast.com.au/images/surfboat3.jpg
>
> Oh dear! What I wouldn't give to be THAT coxswain :-) I live in the
> wrong country! Thanks Howard!
> >http://bhslsc.midcoast.com.au/images/surfboat3.jpgAny idea where one could buy that "universal joint" type of oarlock?
Without the pin running crosswise through the oar, it might be handy
for my yuloh.
Garth
OK! Got it! The sentence below that cleared it up for me was your
parends about the oar not being completely parallel to the water -
that was how I'd been thinking about it.
In the building notes, Phil clearly intends that the oar handle be
rotated, not pushed or pulled from side to side as a tiller.
Thanks,
Gordy
-- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Derby" <derbyrm@e...> wrote:
parends about the oar not being completely parallel to the water -
that was how I'd been thinking about it.
In the building notes, Phil clearly intends that the oar handle be
rotated, not pushed or pulled from side to side as a tiller.
Thanks,
Gordy
-- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Derby" <derbyrm@e...> wrote:
> Where does the brain cramp come in? Mentally take a section of theoar
> parallel to the waterline. As the oar is rotated, the sectionchanges its
> angle of attack to the moving water and deflects it to one side orthe
> other. Reaction pushes the oar, or the helmsman, or the boat'sstern to the
> opposite side. (I've assumed the oar's axis is not completelyparallel to
> the waterline.) There is also a component of force wanting toraise or
> lower the oar.
>
>
Great Picture! I have become a BIG fan of the steering oar. I build a
14' proa and have rediscovered the advantages of the system. They add
another dimension other than just pointing the boat while underway. The
biggest advantage is that the oar can be a dynamic advantage when the
boat is dead in the water. Many years ago when in Coast Guard Boot Camp
I was on the "boat team" and we trained in life boats and the few times I
was allowed to coxswain the boat I was thrilled with its infinite
possibilities. It is especially good for a small short boat (like
PDRacer) that does not easily come about.
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 07:49:24 -0000 "Peter Lenihan"
<peterlenihan@...> writes:
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Howard Stephenson" <stephensonhw@a...>
wrote:
wrong country! Thanks Howard!
Peter Lenihan
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
14' proa and have rediscovered the advantages of the system. They add
another dimension other than just pointing the boat while underway. The
biggest advantage is that the oar can be a dynamic advantage when the
boat is dead in the water. Many years ago when in Coast Guard Boot Camp
I was on the "boat team" and we trained in life boats and the few times I
was allowed to coxswain the boat I was thrilled with its infinite
possibilities. It is especially good for a small short boat (like
PDRacer) that does not easily come about.
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 07:49:24 -0000 "Peter Lenihan"
<peterlenihan@...> writes:
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Howard Stephenson" <stephensonhw@a...>
wrote:
>http://bhslsc.midcoast.com.au/images/surfboat3.jpgOh dear! What I wouldn't give to be THAT coxswain :-) I live in the
>
> Howard
wrong country! Thanks Howard!
Peter Lenihan
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Howard Stephenson" <stephensonhw@a...>
wrote:
wrong country! Thanks Howard!
Peter Lenihan
wrote:
> See:Oh dear! What I wouldn't give to be THAT coxswain :-) I live in the
>
>http://bhslsc.midcoast.com.au/images/surfboat3.jpg
>
> Howard
wrong country! Thanks Howard!
Peter Lenihan
Downside to using an oar to steer is they float, so to keep it deep
enough to be even marginally effective you need to hold it down, can
be a bit tiring after awile.
Bill H.
enough to be even marginally effective you need to hold it down, can
be a bit tiring after awile.
Bill H.
> I have a brain cramp understanding the hydrodynamics of using anoar
> rotated about its long axis as opposed to a rudder. (I have asimilar
> problem with the variations of yulohs, but that's another story!)hatches ,
> Regardless, if a rotating, long, shallow foil works, why isn't it
> used in more designs?
> What led to this question is that I was thinking of using the CWS
> hull, but air-boxing in the ends, adding centerline narrow
> and leaving the center either open or with very narrow sitting-width
> decks - exactly the opposite of what Phil did.case
>
> I know the dangers of changing the designers plans, but in this
> the hull form, scantlings, sail rig, etc. would be unchanged.the
> Instead of having the oar going through a hole in the freeflooding
> transom stern, its fulcrum would need to be raised to the top of
> stern airbox. Alternatively, it would be simple enough to add aworks
> conventional transom mounted rudder, but if an oar works, and
> well, why not use a piece of equipment that I would be carryingI'd
> anyway for a dual purpose? After all, if I broke the 'oar-rudder'
> always have a spare handy.
>
> Thoughts, comments?
>
> Gordy
Where does the brain cramp come in? Mentally take a section of the oar
parallel to the waterline. As the oar is rotated, the section changes its
angle of attack to the moving water and deflects it to one side or the
other. Reaction pushes the oar, or the helmsman, or the boat's stern to the
opposite side. (I've assumed the oar's axis is not completely parallel to
the waterline.) There is also a component of force wanting to raise or
lower the oar.
High aspect ratio foils are generally regarded as more efficient than those
with width more nearly equal to length, until one gets into shallow water
and breaks them off. Even in aircraft design, high aspect ratio is not the
universal grail -- seehttp://members.aol.com/slicklynne/facet.htmor
Google "high aspect ratio" aircraft. (include the quote marks)
Roger
derbyrm@...
http://home.earthlink.net/~derbyrm
parallel to the waterline. As the oar is rotated, the section changes its
angle of attack to the moving water and deflects it to one side or the
other. Reaction pushes the oar, or the helmsman, or the boat's stern to the
opposite side. (I've assumed the oar's axis is not completely parallel to
the waterline.) There is also a component of force wanting to raise or
lower the oar.
High aspect ratio foils are generally regarded as more efficient than those
with width more nearly equal to length, until one gets into shallow water
and breaks them off. Even in aircraft design, high aspect ratio is not the
universal grail -- seehttp://members.aol.com/slicklynne/facet.htmor
Google "high aspect ratio" aircraft. (include the quote marks)
Roger
derbyrm@...
http://home.earthlink.net/~derbyrm
----- Original Message -----
From: "don_gordy_gordon" <don_gordy_gordon@...>
To: <bolger@yahoogroups.com>
>I have a brain cramp understanding the hydrodynamics of using an oar
> rotated about its long axis as opposed to a rudder. (I have a similar
> problem with the variations of yulohs, but that's another story!)
> Regardless, if a rotating, long, shallow foil works, why isn't it
> used in more designs?
One advantage of a steering oar is that even when a boat is not moving
through the water (or moving very slowly) it can be used to change the
attitude of the boat relative to oncoming waves. See:
http://bhslsc.midcoast.com.au/images/surfboat3.jpg
Howard
through the water (or moving very slowly) it can be used to change the
attitude of the boat relative to oncoming waves. See:
http://bhslsc.midcoast.com.au/images/surfboat3.jpg
Howard
On 8/24/05, don_gordy_gordon
a boat at all. The oar should be oscillated back and forth, with
the blade 'cutting the water'.
> Regardless, if a rotating, long, shallow foil works, why isn't itNo, I don't think rotating an oar about its long axis would propel
> used in more designs?
a boat at all. The oar should be oscillated back and forth, with
the blade 'cutting the water'.
I have a brain cramp understanding the hydrodynamics of using an oar
rotated about its long axis as opposed to a rudder. (I have a similar
problem with the variations of yulohs, but that's another story!)
Regardless, if a rotating, long, shallow foil works, why isn't it
used in more designs?
What led to this question is that I was thinking of using the CWS
hull, but air-boxing in the ends, adding centerline narrow hatches ,
and leaving the center either open or with very narrow sitting-width
decks - exactly the opposite of what Phil did.
I know the dangers of changing the designers plans, but in this case
the hull form, scantlings, sail rig, etc. would be unchanged.
Instead of having the oar going through a hole in the freeflooding
transom stern, its fulcrum would need to be raised to the top of the
stern airbox. Alternatively, it would be simple enough to add a
conventional transom mounted rudder, but if an oar works, and works
well, why not use a piece of equipment that I would be carrying
anyway for a dual purpose? After all, if I broke the 'oar-rudder' I'd
always have a spare handy.
Thoughts, comments?
Gordy
rotated about its long axis as opposed to a rudder. (I have a similar
problem with the variations of yulohs, but that's another story!)
Regardless, if a rotating, long, shallow foil works, why isn't it
used in more designs?
What led to this question is that I was thinking of using the CWS
hull, but air-boxing in the ends, adding centerline narrow hatches ,
and leaving the center either open or with very narrow sitting-width
decks - exactly the opposite of what Phil did.
I know the dangers of changing the designers plans, but in this case
the hull form, scantlings, sail rig, etc. would be unchanged.
Instead of having the oar going through a hole in the freeflooding
transom stern, its fulcrum would need to be raised to the top of the
stern airbox. Alternatively, it would be simple enough to add a
conventional transom mounted rudder, but if an oar works, and works
well, why not use a piece of equipment that I would be carrying
anyway for a dual purpose? After all, if I broke the 'oar-rudder' I'd
always have a spare handy.
Thoughts, comments?
Gordy