Print Page | Close Window

Detuning a Penultimate International 14?

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=13759
Printed Date: 03 Dec 22 at 9:31am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.665y - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Detuning a Penultimate International 14?
Posted By: skslr
Subject: Detuning a Penultimate International 14?
Date Posted: 18 Mar 21 at 10:47am

[Multiple edits desperately trying and failing to fix the formating...]

Hi all,

 I would like to get your feedback on a somewhat weird idea:

We are looking for a dinghy for sailing on a little local gravel pit with the usual “all-over-the-place” wind.

 Requirements

- Selfdraining, center/daggerboard close to the water when capsized, low tendency to turtle for capsizing fun with the kids

- Sufficient buoyancy to support 180 kg crew without excessively dragging transom in light airs when sailing with friends

- Single trapeze to entertain kid (when sailing with one adult, not the whole family at the same time)

- Cheap “beach toy”, we got another dinghy for “serious” (whatever that meansLOL) sailing

- Sail area big enough to keep moving in light airs

-  Sail area small enough to not require trapezing 

- Overall sailing weight light enough to launch/retrieve with one adult only

 The cheap “local” dinghies (e.g. “Korsar”, “Pirat”, “Yxilon” in Germany mostly lack the doublefloor and/or are too heavy. “British” "family" dinghies like RS Vision are rare and priced accordingly Ouch

However due to the strong international 14 class association there are quite a few outdated international 14s around and now a 1987 Ovington Benedict 4 is offered for little money.

It would already bring a (relatively) low weight, double floor, absence of side tanks and trapezes with it.

Would it make any sense to cut down the (aluminum) Rigg by  3 foot (or 4 foot if someone changed it to a “big rig”) and look for some smaller/not fully-battened/second hand sails of e.g. an 470 to make it somewhat more “manageable”? (Including some flotation in the mast top when sailing with a kid, the gravel pit is way to small to make the risk of the capsized boat drifting away too quickly an issue...)

Int14s are generally supposed to support more crew weight than say an RS500 or a 29er, does anyone remember if this specific design did?

Thank you!

PS: I do have a soft spot for international 14s but not enough to think an arbitrary Penultimate with clapped out sails is worth saving/maintaining it as “int14”Smile




Replies:
Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 18 Mar 21 at 11:04am
A mate put a National 12 rig on a vintage International 14 and it worked out as a very pleasant family sailing boat, and not nearly as dull in light airs as one might have thought. The more modern design is going to be a bit less light airs friendly than his 60s boat, but those penultimate hull shapes were arguably better in light airs than serious breeze.


Posted By: Sam.Spoons
Date Posted: 18 Mar 21 at 11:27am
I think you may be asking the impossible. ISO or L4k could be an option but they're never going to be family boats and anything roomy enough for there or four is going to be too big for one and a child.

-------------
Spice 346 "Flat Broke"
Blaze 671 "supersonic soap dish"


Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 18 Mar 21 at 12:11pm
Originally posted by Sam.Spoons

I think you may be asking the impossible. ISO or L4k could be an option but they're never going to be family boats and anything roomy enough for there or four is going to be too big for one and a child.

It would be only intended for two persons at a time, not the whole familiy at once.

Not sure if the L4k with its racks and hull shape is any better for a gravel pit than a Penultimate.

ISO would be an option if there is a cheap one available, looks pretty similar anyway :-)
The threshold for removing the wings is 135 kg, does anybody know how far the weight range extends beyond that?


Posted By: davidyacht
Date Posted: 18 Mar 21 at 12:45pm
Nothing wrong with getting out on the water in anything, but;-

Benedict IV was probably the easiest 14 of its generation to sail and had good ergonomics, but was demanding even of some of the best sailors of that time.  Also will be a handful to get upright if you capsize.  Probably not great to tack compared with sit out boats ... I remember doing a handicap regatta week in an estuary in a Benedict and still cross tacking with a Lark after an hour of racing!

If you put a smaller rig on, you really need to try and keep longitudinal the centre of effort in the same place or the boat will be very unbalanced.

If you sail on a gravel pit, then the dagger board might not be too forgiving when you run aground.

There are other boats that would fit your brief better, but they will also cost you more.


-------------
Happily living in the past


Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 18 Mar 21 at 1:51pm
Originally posted by davidyacht

Nothing wrong with getting out on the water in anything, but;-

Benedict IV was probably the easiest 14 of its generation to sail and had good ergonomics, but was demanding even of some of the best sailors of that time.  Also will be a handful to get upright if you capsize.  Probably not great to tack compared with sit out boats ... I remember doing a handicap regatta week in an estuary in a Benedict and still cross tacking with a Lark after an hour of racing!

If you put a smaller rig on, you really need to try and keep longitudinal the centre of effort in the same place or the boat will be very unbalanced.

If you sail on a gravel pit, then the dagger board might not be too forgiving when you run aground.

There are other boats that would fit your brief better, but they will also cost you more.

Thank you!
 

Righting: Requiring both crew  on the Daggerboard was fairly typical back then - I hope it would get easier with a shorter mast and smaller sails!

Tacking: That's a trade-off we will need to accept then. The (very low key) club races are dominated by ILCAs anyway Smile
 
Fore/aft balance: Understood. Not sure if some of the 14s back then could move the daggerboard some inches back and fore ashore by placing some kind of "chocks" in the daggerboard slot. If yes this could help to balance the boat again.

Running aground: The gravel pit is up to 15 m deep  -  that's the one thing I do not worry about :-)




Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 18 Mar 21 at 2:26pm
Fore and aft balance is IMHO greatly exaggerated. Look at the number of one design classes with sails that barely fit the boat since rake has been increased so much since the designer drew it. On a modern dinghy side load is shared between rudder and daggerboard. Move the rig back and forward and the helm completely automatically increases or reduced the angle of incidence of the rudder by a fraction to compensate.

The N12 rig on a 14 mentioned above (which I set up for him) is perfectly satisfactory - indeed to my astonishment even the jib sheeting angle was good and it didn't even need a barber hauler added. I'd be mildly surprised if a 470 rig didn't do a good job. I think I'd try and source a complete rig rather than chop up the 14 spars though. A 29er rig might be the best option, but more trouble to find than a 470.


Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 18 Mar 21 at 3:21pm
Originally posted by JimC

Fore and aft balance is IMHO greatly exaggerated. Look at the number of one design classes with sails that barely fit the boat since rake has been increased so much since the designer drew it. On a modern dinghy side load is shared between rudder and daggerboard. Move the rig back and forward and the helm completely automatically increases or reduced the angle of incidence of the rudder by a fraction to compensate.

The N12 rig on a 14 mentioned above (which I set up for him) is perfectly satisfactory - indeed to my astonishment even the jib sheeting angle was good and it didn't even need a barber hauler added. I'd be mildly surprised if a 470 rig didn't do a good job. I think I'd try and source a complete rig rather than chop up the 14 spars though. A 29er rig might be the best option, but more trouble to find than a 470.

I have to admit, cutting the mast is somewhat tempting and would save the search, purchase cost and the transport of another mast Smile

I have seen someone cutting down a similar broken int14 mast for a rigg similar to an 470 so it should be not that far off. Not sure if I would still trust the composite mast tip of a 29er Rigg that is being sold cheaply with UV impact and all that - if available at all.

Just saw a brand new Windesign 420 main and Jib package for 665 Euros. Maybe that would actually work better than clapped out 470 sails?




Posted By: davidyacht
Date Posted: 18 Mar 21 at 5:04pm
Out of interest what is the number?  I had two

-------------
Happily living in the past


Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 18 Mar 21 at 5:39pm
Well the trouble is the whole business of rig performance comes into it. Bearing in mind the intended purpose a hard mouthed bitch of a rig with the gust response of a telegraph pole isn't going to cut the mustard. What you are going to need is gust response and a sail matched to the mast.

That's why I think a 29er rig would be the best bet: its the most responsive rig of about the right size that might be readily available to you. A good IC or Cherub rig might even be better, but finding a good one available on the second hand market anywhere near you will be next to impossible. From what I recall last time I looked at one 470 rigs tend to be setup for power rather than gust response, but I still reckon its going to be better than a Frankenrig.


Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 18 Mar 21 at 10:06pm
Originally posted by davidyacht

Out of interest what is the number?  I had two

The kite for the one in question now still says K1223. My wife had the former K1220 more than 15 years ago.


Back then there were considerable differences between the masts...





Posted By: davidyacht
Date Posted: 19 Mar 21 at 9:00am
Ah, mine were 1208 and 1242.  Think the numbers were drilled into the centre transom bar support moulding.  There were quite a few attempts at finding masts that stayed up back then, particularly during the transition to assymetric kites

-------------
Happily living in the past


Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 22 Mar 21 at 3:25pm

Bad news (or maybe it saved me from doing something stupid?):

The offer for the penultimate international 14 was just too good and someone else was faster.

 I followed the advice to look for a 29er Rigg with sails and actually found a cheap rigg with a hull under it, with just the kite missing.

Now a 29er would barely float at the upper end at the intended crew weight range, so that’s no option here.

 So unless another cheap international pops up I need to look at alternatives.

 Does anyone have proposals for cheap double floored hulls that weigh in at < 100 kgs and can support 180 kg combined crews without dragging the transom through the water / forcing the crew to move in front of the shrouds or even the mast?



Posted By: Sam.Spoons
Date Posted: 22 Mar 21 at 4:42pm
You probably need a shortlist of classes that are available within a couple of hours drive of you, if you were in the UK I'd say Buzz, L2000 (a little on the heavy side admittedly and would probably stretch the budget), ISO, Laser 2 and L3k are probably a bit on the small size for 180kg...

There used to be a dinghy database on the Noble website but it disappeared in the last revamp. I did save a copy as an Excel spreadsheet if it might be of help identifying suitable candidates.   https://www.dropbox.com/s/a4nk3jngwiye9ha/Dinghy%20Database.xls?dl=0" rel="nofollow - https://www.dropbox.com/s/a4nk3jngwiye9ha/Dinghy%20Database.xls?dl=0


-------------
Spice 346 "Flat Broke"
Blaze 671 "supersonic soap dish"


Posted By: Old bloke
Date Posted: 22 Mar 21 at 4:46pm
Not double floored, but a 505 ticks all your other boxes


Posted By: Sam.Spoons
Date Posted: 22 Mar 21 at 5:24pm
Except 'single handing' with a child crew...

Great boats though Thumbs Up


-------------
Spice 346 "Flat Broke"
Blaze 671 "supersonic soap dish"


Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 22 Mar 21 at 5:29pm
Topper Boss with a cut down rig.

-------------
Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686


Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 22 Mar 21 at 5:32pm
ISO probably makes more "sense", though, as much as any of this does!

Genuine sense would suggest a Sport 14 or similar, but not very exciting compared to a 14. Sense is overrated...

-------------
Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686


Posted By: Old bloke
Date Posted: 23 Mar 21 at 8:55am
A 505 is a much better prospect for light weather singlehandedly +/- a small child than a 14 or Boss. I, and many others, have done exactly that, including flying the kite and trapezing, without much problem.
We're not talking force 5 at Mount's Bay.


Posted By: Sam.Spoons
Date Posted: 23 Mar 21 at 10:20am
True but the OP is not (unless I'm missing something) considering a Boss, L5k or a 14 with the standard rig  but something considerably de-tuned in comparison hence the suggestions for Buzz or L2/3k

-------------
Spice 346 "Flat Broke"
Blaze 671 "supersonic soap dish"


Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 23 Mar 21 at 12:20pm
Originally posted by Sam.Spoons

You probably need a shortlist of classes that are available within a couple of hours drive of you, if you were in the UK I'd say Buzz, L2000 (a little on the heavy side admittedly and would probably stretch the budget), ISO, Laser 2 and L3k are probably a bit on the small size for 180kg...

There used to be a dinghy database on the Noble website but it disappeared in the last revamp. I did save a copy as an Excel spreadsheet if it might be of help identifying suitable candidates.   https://www.dropbox.com/s/a4nk3jngwiye9ha/Dinghy%20Database.xls?dl=0" rel="nofollow - https://www.dropbox.com/s/a4nk3jngwiye9ha/Dinghy%20Database.xls?dl=0

Does a Buzz carry weight better than an ISO? I always thought Buzz/Spice are more for lightweight teams and ISO/Boss for heavy teams, but maybe I am wrong here?

Thank you for providing the Excel! I got an error message for the dropbox link, I need to try again with a different PC.

Originally posted by Old bloke

Not double floored, but a 505 ticks all your other boxes

A 505 would be really nice for the sailing itself and I am pretty confident I could handle it with one of the childs most of the time. I would even consider it as "relatively stable". But SWMBO would not accept the single floor, the "look" and  weight would be right on the edge.

Originally posted by Rupert

Topper Boss with a cut down rig.

Now we start talking Big smile

There is actually one for sale right now in Germany, but it looks like the asking price is based rather on the money recently spend dacron(!) sails than on age and the absence of any class racing in Germany.

Originally posted by Rupert

ISO probably makes more "sense", though, as much as any of this does!

Genuine sense would suggest a Sport 14 or similar, but not very exciting compared to a 14. Sense is overrated...

Exactly Big smile

It would be way more sensible to sell the other dinghy and spend the money on a 2000, Vision, or even a Quest. My daughter actually wants me to buy a Quest....

Originally posted by Sam.Spoons

True but the OP is not (unless I'm missing something) considering a Boss, L5k or a 14 with the standard rig  but something considerably de-tuned in comparison hence the suggestions for Buzz or L2/3k

"Considerably de-tuned" is exactly the idea. SWMBO and I would certainly try out the original configuration  first just for giggles, but the goal is to sail with one of the kids or a friend.

(And not only the friends who are used to helm from the wire ...) 


 




Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 23 Mar 21 at 12:48pm
I'm struggling to think of a better option to the 14 as a donor hull. You really want bigger than a 14 for various reasons, but probably not brutally heavy like Boss/5 tonner. A 49er hull with wings removed might work.


Posted By: Sam.Spoons
Date Posted: 23 Mar 21 at 1:41pm
Yes, Buzz (and Spice) is good up to 170kg apparently, the ISO will carry more weight. But there is no single boat that will fit your requirements without compromise.

To summerise :-

100 -180 kg crew weight range, 
Trapeze and double bottom but doesn't need weight forward of shrouds in the light, 
Light weight on shore, 
Cheap... 

IMO the first two requirements are impossible to fully reconcile, a boat that works well with 100kg on board is not going to work well with 180 kg on board and a double bottom trapeze boat  is almost certainly going to be vaguely skiffy and will need weigh well forward to stop it dragging the transom in the light. The L2k is one of very few boats that might do it but falls down on weight ashore and price.

That said, compromise doesn't have to be such a bad thing, I have had loads of fun sailing the Spice, often at the very top end of the weight range and also singlehanded in sub 8 kn, it's a huge compromise but has still be a joy over the last 12 years.


-------------
Spice 346 "Flat Broke"
Blaze 671 "supersonic soap dish"


Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 23 Mar 21 at 3:01pm
Originally posted by JimC

I'm struggling to think of a better option to the 14 as a donor hull. You really want bigger than a 14 for various reasons, but probably not brutally heavy like Boss/5 tonner. A 49er hull with wings removed might work.

The internet claims the Boss hull weight only being 85 kg  - is that just marketing BS?

Compared to a 49er the Boss still looks more like a "Boat" with cockpit side walls and so on :-)

Originally posted by Sam.Spoons

Yes, Buzz (and Spice) is good up to 170kg apparently, the ISO will carry more weight. But there is no single boat that will fit your requirements without compromise.

To summerise :-

100 -180 kg crew weight range, 
Trapeze and double bottom but doesn't need weight forward of shrouds in the light, 
Light weight on shore, 
Cheap... 

IMO the first two requirements are impossible to fully reconcile, a boat that works well with 100kg on board is not going to work well with 180 kg on board and a double bottom trapeze boat  is almost certainly going to be vaguely skiffy and will need weigh well forward to stop it dragging the transom in the light. The L2k is one of very few boats that might do it but falls down on weight ashore and price.

That said, compromise doesn't have to be such a bad thing, I have had loads of fun sailing the Spice, often at the very top end of the weight range and also singlehanded in sub 8 kn, it's a huge compromise but has still be a joy over the last 12 years.

The "100 kg" stemm from the min hull weight for penultimate int 14s. Sailing with my son would already mean 130 kg crew weight, unfortunately I am not far off the 100 kg on my own...


Posted By: Sam.Spoons
Date Posted: 23 Mar 21 at 4:22pm
Yeah, 100kg was a guess on my part more to illustrate the point TBH (but single handing to two average+ sized adults covers it).

Apparently the Boss was not as much overweight as one might have expected looking at it but it wasn't;t a 49er style lightweight and Topper did have a rep for quoting hull weights totally stripped bare. FWIW my Spice claims 85kg but a well connected insider told me that that was, in reality, the weight of a bare hull with no fittings, space frames or anything else and people don't refer to the L5k as the 5 tonner without reason either.

Bear in mind that while the L2k is probably the ideal boat for your circumstances it does weigh 140kg hull with fittings so probably nearer 165-170 ready to sail.

I can email the .xls if you like (pm you email address)?


-------------
Spice 346 "Flat Broke"
Blaze 671 "supersonic soap dish"


Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 23 Mar 21 at 9:36pm
I was now able to download the .xls. Thank you!


Posted By: Sam.Spoons
Date Posted: 24 Mar 21 at 12:03pm
Thumbs Up Bear in mind the PNs are not up to date...

-------------
Spice 346 "Flat Broke"
Blaze 671 "supersonic soap dish"


Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 24 Mar 21 at 4:24pm

Apparently it has been done before, the internet says that int14 with 470 riggs were built in the U.S. as “one designs”...

I guess for handicapping our club's race officer would simply take the current yardstick value for international 14s in Germany instead of getting tangled up in a discussion how much the "detuning" should increase the number...

At least we got a separate value for int14s before 1995, which is the same value as an FD.




Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 24 Mar 21 at 7:04pm
There was an OD14 built in the US in late single string days as I recall (based on a Cross design 14), but I'm pretty confident it didn't have a 470 rig.



Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 25 Mar 21 at 8:54am
The Jet 14 from much earlier might be the boat you are thinking of.

-------------
Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686


Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 25 Mar 21 at 8:56am


-------------
Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686


Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 26 Mar 21 at 10:39am
More like this one maybe:

https://www.sailingtexas.com/sonedesign14101.html" rel="nofollow - One Design, 14, 1989, Springfield, Missouri sailboat for sale (sailingtexas.com)

Apparently there was a "Standard" rigg more 470ish and a "Grand Prix" rigg which may have met the int14 rules back then.


Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 12 Apr 21 at 2:12pm
Thanks to your encouraging words in this thread we actively searched for a Penultimate International 14, found an Ovington Howlett 1 B and bought it for too little money to complain about anything.

As this is a "project" anyway, we accepted that it is not really ready to sail:

Hull

Some fine cracks in the gelcoat, but nothing severe in the high-stress areas. Transom has some strange little drain holes whithout any threads for plugs or whatsoever.
We could easily lift it with two persons so it cannot be massively overweight, some day we will weigh it properly. Some GRP repairs have not been repainted but we could not care less. The non-slip is pink, even my daughter is not sure about this one.
Anyway, the kids want a unicorn head to be drawn on the bow such that the kite pole is the "horn" :-)

Rigg

Alumnium twin spreader, mast foot is not on the cockpit floor, but on top of the reinforcement tubing between bow and chainplates. 
The original push rod at gooseneck height has been replaced with lowers.

Boom

Previous owner could not find it anymore. But we luckily found another int14 Boom for next to nothing.

Daggerboard

Made from wood, needs some glas + epoxi but hopefully no major root. To really now this we would need to sand off the white paint...
The hull features a kind of cassette for the daggerboard that can be moved about 2 inches forward or backward by repositioning chocks.


Rudder

Only the blade itself of the fixed rudder was still there. The leading edge was severly damaged, the lower fitting was somehow ripped off, leading edge has been rotting away quite badly.
We would like some kind of lifting rudder, but the distance between the fittings on the hull is quite a bit larger than on e.g. RS boats, so standard rudder stocks do not fit.
Maybe we can rebuild the rudder blade and have some local shop build a bespoke rudder stock?

Fittings

Figuring out all the sytems for adjustable mast rake and so on will take a lot of time. Changing mast rake hardly makes any sense on our little gravel pit. Main sheet cleat is missing, the idea is to change to transom/off-boom sheeting anyway.
If we can make the jib furler work again it will help launching etc when one of our kids is crewing. For the same reason I would like to lead at least the vang back to the helm, right now all the control lines are cleated at the shrouds.

Sails

All measured during the 90s...
Jib and first main are still ok. The lower part of the second main is really worn out, so it would be a good candidate for cutting it down...
The kite cloth is really, really soft :-)

The Jib is so big that we will do a test with the mainsail of our RS Feva which will create the targeted sail area in total - of course this would move the center of effort way forward...

Trolley

Would propbably work ok for a light weight 12 foot boat, way to small for this one. Fixing this one is only second priority :-)


Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 12 Apr 21 at 3:28pm
Daggerboard rudders are good. I'd investigate whether the fixed blade can be converted into one. There's an article on making the stock on the UK Cherub web site. Its not too difficult a job.
If you're going to run a smaller rig I'd forget all the rig adjustment stuff.


Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 13 Apr 21 at 12:24pm
PS: We did not find any serial number on the hull but one of the main sails shows sail number GBR 1272.


Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 19 Apr 21 at 10:01am
This week-end we had the mast up the first time...


Boom


The boom we bought separatey somehow has got two outhaul mechanisms we do not fully understand. One features a kind of lever at the front end of the boom. Maybe "Coarse" and "fine" control??? (In German we would call it "dead center lever", whatever that is in English...) Does anyone have an idea how this may have worked?

The vang already has got continuous control lines led to the transom, unfortunately the cleats "disappeared" at the previous owner...



Rigg

We reduced the 4 trapezes to only 2, the 3rd wire will serve as temporary forestay in the future. Neither the jib nor the rigg came with a forestay, so the jib seems to be from a different i14 and
features a zipper on the luff. We tried 4 mm Dynema but I suspect that a wire would be better to "forward" the rotations of the roller drum up the luff if that makes any sense.

The shroud tension control stuff will go away. I would like to remove the uppers together with the purchase and control lines as well, but SWMBO has not yet agreed to move the kite halyard block from the top of the mast to about forestay height yet... 

Another thing I do not fully understand is why this rigg needs lowers. As the gooseneck  is not far above the spaceframe and the mastfoot is level with the space frame (i.e. not on the cockpit floor as it was common back then), there is not a lot of "lever" for the boom to bend the mast/the mast is fixed on space frame level anyway. Any thoughts on this?



Other Fittings

The kite sheet ratched blocks and the halyard cleat "disappeared" as well... 
There are many turning blocks distributed through the whole lengths of the boat, presumably related to the fact that kite sock and boom reach so much further back into the cockpit than in most other dinghies. We are trying to understand the layout by looking at old pictures of another (however well sorted) Ovington Howlett 1 B.



Main

We tried our RS Feva-main. It kind of works at least ashore but there is a lot of excess height/length of mast/boom left :-). 



Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 19 Apr 21 at 12:33pm
photos would help...


Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 19 Apr 21 at 8:42pm
Front end of boom:









Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 19 Apr 21 at 8:43pm
Spaceframe with "mast stump":




Posted By: davidyacht
Date Posted: 19 Apr 21 at 8:48pm
Was a Selden boom with course and fine adjustment, not sure of the benefit, we had multi purchase inside of the boom onto a single cleat and turning block, since there was plenty to keep you busy rather than fiddle with the mainsail foot

-------------
Happily living in the past


Posted By: davidyacht
Date Posted: 19 Apr 21 at 8:50pm
Don’t think that the stump was original, the Ovy Howlett that we had 1301 still had a hog stepped mast 

-------------
Happily living in the past


Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 20 Apr 21 at 10:33am
Hmm, yes, I very much doubt that setup is original, but I would definitely want lowers with any distance of gooseneck above mast. The kicker load is going in the mast whatever.

The big question is what are you planning to do with mast and sails. And a second question, which you probably can't answer, is how well does the rig you've got actually work.

A mainsail for a properly designed twin spreader rig will have entirely the wrong luff round to be used without caps, but there was a tendency in some classes and some places to just bung caps on a single spreader rig to hold up a kite downwind without much thought about upwind. In my opinion that was not a good rig, but if you have one taking caps off isn't an issue.


Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 26 Apr 21 at 9:04am

This week-end we  weighed the hull: About 89 kgs is pretty goodto me, considering some blocks and the mainsheet base are missing it should be more or less the minimum weight of 30 years ago.

While attending some holes in the underside of the hull I realized that it was already built out of  foam sandwich. I always believed the spaceframes kind of became obsolete with sandwich construction?


Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 26 Apr 21 at 12:16pm
It took some time to realise there were better ways of doing things. Its not so much that space frames are bad per se but that those big fabricated aluminium constructions were expensive and heavy, especially compared to having the same strength built into internal framing with carbon. And also the 14 rule set of the time tended to push people down odd paths. Neither expensive nor heavy were significant issues for the 14s of that period!


Posted By: Lukepiewalker
Date Posted: 10 May 21 at 6:36pm
Until the 1996 unification foredecks weren't allowed, so spaceframes were very much the thing.


-------------
Ex-Finn GBR533 "Pie Hard"
Ex-National 12 3253 "Seawitch"
Ex-National 12 2961 "Curved Air"
Ex-Mirror 59096 "Voodoo Chile"


Posted By: piglet
Date Posted: 11 May 21 at 9:21pm
That space frame looks identical to the one we had in 1188, I think that boat went to Belgium?????
I'm sure the number will be in the hull somewhere.
1188 was a single trapeze rules converted to twin trapeze rules, great boat but the mast was long, heavy & didn't bend at all!


Posted By: piglet
Date Posted: 11 May 21 at 9:22pm
RS400 rig?


Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 12 May 21 at 2:06pm

We do not really know the sail number of our current i14 as the paperwork is lost and we did not find any number on the hull yet. But it looks like it was built for asymmetric kites right away, so it should be after the rule change in 1989.

 

The aluminum mast would still qualify as heavy (though shorter as it is stepped on top of the space frame) but I hope it will bend somewhat at the top due to being tapered.

 

There are probably only 2 or 3 RS400 in Germany so spare riggs will be hard to find. Sail area would be on the high side of what we are targeting and I am not sure how well they would take a single trapeze.

 

However we looked at the suggestion to use a 29er rig again: Actually there are quite a few 29er for sale to due to “serious” youth teams moving on. Maybe we should talk some of the teams into selling their spare parts/sails separately and build a rigg from that??? I guess that would break our “low budget approach” and we would end up paying ten times the money for rigg & sails compared to what we initially paid for the boat J

 

Today will be another day putting glass&epoxy on rudderblade  and daggerboard, at the same time the parcels with parts for the “bespoke” rudder stock we are intending to  build are arriving….


Good news is that pressure testing the hull went kind of o.k., even though the hull does not meet the class rules from back then anymore.



Posted By: MikeBz
Date Posted: 17 May 21 at 1:17pm
Originally posted by davidyacht

Don’t think that the stump was original, the Ovy Howlett that we had 1301 still had a hog stepped mast 

We had the first customer Ovy Howlett 1B, 1302, and that was stumped from new.  At my request the spaceframe included an aluminium plate underneath the rectangular section, on top of which I put the mast step and underneath a section of old mast as the stump.  I don't believe it's the one in the pics as the plate on which the step sits is somewhat smaller.

Originally posted by skslr

We do not really know the sail number of our current i14 as the paperwork is lost and we did not find any number on the hull yet. But it looks like it was built for asymmetric kites right away, so it should be after the rule change in 1989.

If it is a Howlett 1B then it will be 1990 or later.  The first one was built & demoed in 1990 and production started that winter.



Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 01 Jun 21 at 6:57am

Another update:

Kite

We hoisted the one that came with the boat. The front leach is way too long. It also says “2003” and a name of a guy that also took part in the 2003 POW/Euros at Hayling Island that we watched from our first Penultimate (I cannot really claim we “competed” in any way, we just have been there out on the water…). The guy had a current boat back then so the kite most likely is intended for post-95 rules rigg.

But a RS800 kite fits quite well.

We figured out a single line system for the kite pole. These boats still had an extra line to extend the pole when they were built, but all the blocks and cleats had disappeared anyway. Our new halyard/retrieval line is a little thin but ok when wearing gloves…

Rudder

We (kind of) finished our DIY lifting rudder based on the partially rotten original fixed rudder. It looks pretty agricultural (everything mounted to two rectangular 3 mm aluminum sheets), but it works…

Mainsail

One was very tired below the sail numbers, so my wife simply cut it horizontally and is now putting the reinforcements for clew and tack on the lower corners of the upper part. The upper part should be about 8 sqm so together with the 5.5 sqm jib it will be a decent sail area for a single trapeze boat.

First sail

We used the other main sail that came with the boat. It is in far better condition so we will leave it like it is for now. In the light winds it yielded some welcome extra push... To me it looks like some mast pre-bend induced with the uppers is necessary to avoid an excessively “deep” sail shape.

The smaller kite together with the big kite sock and the thin halyard worked really well.

Unfortunately the daggerboard did not fit the case properly anymore, so the vang just cleared its upper front edge when fully releasedL. After many hours of sanding down both daggerboard and case it is still an issue… The case ( or actually the insert) looks like they used some kind of paper based material back in 1990...




Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 01 Jun 21 at 10:44am
The name on the kite is most likely a measurer rather than the owner.


Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 18 Jun 21 at 9:36am
Yesterday we tested the „entertaining the kids” aspect:

•     Towing an inflatable “unicorn” worked surprisingly well
•     Using the newly installed “free to us” second hand hiking straps to bend over backwards until the head touches the water surfaces worked
•     Trapezing worked
•     Changing to off-boom sheeting and removing the helm’s trapeze wires in combination with the mast mounted far forward and absence of side decks creates sufficient room for 2 adults and a kid even on only 14 foot hull length.
•     Furling the jib adds the area in front of the mast, e.g. when the kite is up

(bullet points sorted according to decreasing importance from my daughter’s point of view )

So overall I think the “detuning” worked 


Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 27 Apr 22 at 7:45am
Our "detuning-projekt" is still alive:

Over the winter my wife made an upper cover, we replaced some cleats and the standing rigging.
At the same time a mouse built a nest in the cockpit structure holding the pole in the bow even though the hull was upside down...

This week-end I sailed it with my 30 kgs daughter so about 120 kgs between the two of us in very shifty and gusty winds (at least force 6 gusts in "forum wind"Big smile), so I opted for the cut-down main (about 8 sqm) and a borrowed jib of a 420 (2,8 sqm). That changed the nature of the boat dramatically compared to the standard int14 sail area and worked very well.

Maybe the hull shape of a 1990s int14 was still better suited to such a small sail area anyway?


Posted By: mole
Date Posted: 27 Apr 22 at 1:38pm
Hi
have you considered a Hornet?
Meets most of your requirements, it is actually in the class rules that you can sail 3 up without the trapeze.
With the right deck layout you could have a competitive 3 person race boat in certain conditions

Great for the kids and your wallet


Posted By: skslr
Date Posted: 28 Apr 22 at 9:57am
Not really.  I am not sure there are any in Germany. Not sure if any of the dutch are left after they tried to add twin wires, racks and asymmetric kites in the early 2000s...

I am also not sure they would have met our "requirements" regarding crew weight and self draining cockpit.

Last week we sailed with > 190 kgs  crew weight and the int14 hull was still doing fine :-)



Print Page | Close Window

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.665y - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2010 Web Wiz - http://www.webwizguide.com