In contemplating sailboat design I think I have found a fundamental flaw,
that when corrected should yield a great improvement in sailboat
performance.

The flaw is that the keel is put before the rudder. I believe this legacy
continues in modern designs because of accident.

The rudder rightfully belongs in front of the keel, not behind it for
reasons that shall become obvious upon further reading.

Firstly, think of cars and motorcycles. Are they steered by rear wheels?
Mostly not and with good reason, the steering is better done by the front
wheels.

In making a turn, the front mounted rudder would direct an increased water
flow to one side of the keel which would increase the effectiveness (lift)
of the keel - keep the boat upright , the sails would have more power, the
boat less leeway and the turn executed much more quickly.

In heavy seas, the forward mounted rudder would provide greater stability
and control because of its beneficial redirection of water to one side of
the keel.

Docking and tight maneuvers would also be much easier because the bow is
steered, rather than the stern.

Under power, the propeller would be many times efficient. The rudder would
not be blocking the thrust of the propeller nor inefficiently redirecting
it.

The rudder could be configured to alter the characteristics of the bow wave
which would increase the hull speed and overall speed of the boat.

Just like railroad tracks are the width of a horse's ass, rear mounted
rudders are the result of the legacy of dry helmsman. In these modern times
it's very practical to put a rudder under the bow and enjoy the increased
performance benefits.

On Thu, 4 Dec 2008 11:24:44 -0700, "Charles Momsen"
wrote:

In contemplating sailboat design I think I have found a fundamental flaw,
that when corrected should yield a great improvement in sailboat
performance.

The flaw is that the keel is put before the rudder. I believe this legacy
continues in modern designs because of accident.

The rudder rightfully belongs in front of the keel, not behind it for
reasons that shall become obvious upon further reading.

Firstly, think of cars and motorcycles. Are they steered by rear wheels?
Mostly not and with good reason, the steering is better done by the front
wheels.

In making a turn, the front mounted rudder would direct an increased water
flow to one side of the keel which would increase the effectiveness (lift)
of the keel - keep the boat upright , the sails would have more power, the
boat less leeway and the turn executed much more quickly.

In heavy seas, the forward mounted rudder would provide greater stability
and control because of its beneficial redirection of water to one side of
the keel.

Docking and tight maneuvers would also be much easier because the bow is
steered, rather than the stern.

Under power, the propeller would be many times efficient. The rudder would
not be blocking the thrust of the propeller nor inefficiently redirecting
it.

The rudder could be configured to alter the characteristics of the bow wave
which would increase the hull speed and overall speed of the boat.

Just like railroad tracks are the width of a horse's ass, rear mounted
rudders are the result of the legacy of dry helmsman. In these modern times
it's very practical to put a rudder under the bow and enjoy the increased
performance benefits.


Unfortunately the water deflected by the forward rudder is so
turbulent that it destroys laminar flow over the keel.




OzOne of the three twins

I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace.

OzOne wrote in message ...
On Thu, 4 Dec 2008 11:24:44 -0700, "Charles Momsen"
wrote:

In contemplating sailboat design I think I have found a fundamental flaw,
that when corrected should yield a great improvement in sailboat
performance.

The flaw is that the keel is put before the rudder. I believe this legacy
continues in modern designs because of accident.

The rudder rightfully belongs in front of the keel, not behind it for
reasons that shall become obvious upon further reading.

Firstly, think of cars and motorcycles. Are they steered by rear wheels?
Mostly not and with good reason, the steering is better done by the front
wheels.

In making a turn, the front mounted rudder would direct an increased water
flow to one side of the keel which would increase the effectiveness (lift)
of the keel - keep the boat upright , the sails would have more power, the
boat less leeway and the turn executed much more quickly.

In heavy seas, the forward mounted rudder would provide greater stability
and control because of its beneficial redirection of water to one side of
the keel.

Docking and tight maneuvers would also be much easier because the bow is
steered, rather than the stern.

Under power, the propeller would be many times efficient. The rudder would
not be blocking the thrust of the propeller nor inefficiently redirecting
it.

The rudder could be configured to alter the characteristics of the bow
wave
which would increase the hull speed and overall speed of the boat.

Just like railroad tracks are the width of a horse's ass, rear mounted
rudders are the result of the legacy of dry helmsman. In these modern
times
it's very practical to put a rudder under the bow and enjoy the increased
performance benefits.


Unfortunately the water deflected by the forward rudder is so
turbulent that it destroys laminar flow over the keel.


Likewise for the alternative arrangement, during any type of turning of the
boat the keel would generate turbulent flow that would destroy laminar flow
about a rudder behind it. Both generalizations may be true in some
instances but not in all instances.

On Thu, 4 Dec 2008 16:16:23 -0700, "Charles Momsen"
wrote:


OzOne wrote in message ...
On Thu, 4 Dec 2008 11:24:44 -0700, "Charles Momsen"
wrote:

In contemplating sailboat design I think I have found a fundamental flaw,
that when corrected should yield a great improvement in sailboat
performance.

The flaw is that the keel is put before the rudder. I believe this legacy
continues in modern designs because of accident.

The rudder rightfully belongs in front of the keel, not behind it for
reasons that shall become obvious upon further reading.

Firstly, think of cars and motorcycles. Are they steered by rear wheels?
Mostly not and with good reason, the steering is better done by the front
wheels.

In making a turn, the front mounted rudder would direct an increased water
flow to one side of the keel which would increase the effectiveness (lift)
of the keel - keep the boat upright , the sails would have more power, the
boat less leeway and the turn executed much more quickly.

In heavy seas, the forward mounted rudder would provide greater stability
and control because of its beneficial redirection of water to one side of
the keel.

Docking and tight maneuvers would also be much easier because the bow is
steered, rather than the stern.

Under power, the propeller would be many times efficient. The rudder would
not be blocking the thrust of the propeller nor inefficiently redirecting
it.

The rudder could be configured to alter the characteristics of the bow
wave
which would increase the hull speed and overall speed of the boat.

Just like railroad tracks are the width of a horse's ass, rear mounted
rudders are the result of the legacy of dry helmsman. In these modern
times
it's very practical to put a rudder under the bow and enjoy the increased
performance benefits.


Unfortunately the water deflected by the forward rudder is so
turbulent that it destroys laminar flow over the keel.


Likewise for the alternative arrangement, during any type of turning of the
boat the keel would generate turbulent flow that would destroy laminar flow
about a rudder behind it. Both generalizations may be true in some
instances but not in all instances.


keel has already had the benefit of laminar flow in the conventional
arrangement.




OzOne of the three twins

I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace.

Front rudder he

http://www.cbtfco.com/

On Thu, 4 Dec 2008 16:23:48 -0700, "Charles Momsen"
wrote:

Front rudder he

http://www.cbtfco.com/


Yep, on a big big boat so flow is not efected over keel as vortices
shed from the forward rudder are outside of the turning radius




OzOne of the three twins

I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace.

Ever seen a fish with forward rudder?
Philip C Bolger was the first to expiriment with the concept (at least in
modern history).

"jlrogers±³©" wrote:
Ever seen a fish with forward rudder?
Philip C Bolger was the first to expiriment with the concept *(at least in
modern history).

One his more interesting experiments/essays... actually he tried it
twice, first time on a boat with a sharpie hull and an experimental
double-luff full-batten main. This boat was very difficult to sail and
was an unmitigated failure (one of the best things about Bolger is he
tells what he's tried that *doesn't* work); but he thought the forward
rudder had possibilities and tried it on another boat of well tried
design.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

wrote in message
...
"jlrogers±³©" wrote:
Ever seen a fish with forward rudder?
Philip C Bolger was the first to expiriment with the concept (at least in
modern history).

One his more interesting experiments/essays... actually he tried it
twice, first time on a boat with a sharpie hull and an experimental
double-luff full-batten main. This boat was very difficult to sail and
was an unmitigated failure (one of the best things about Bolger is he
tells what he's tried that *doesn't* work); but he thought the forward
rudder had possibilities and tried it on another boat of well tried
design.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

It was tried here in 2006:

http://www.mediterraneanavenue.com/F...likeButter.pdf

Some benefits are mentioned.

"Charles Momsen" wrote:
It was tried here in 2006:

http://www.mediterraneanavenue.com/F...likeButter.pdf

Some benefits are mentioned.

Heck, there were America's Cup boats with forward rudders in the
1980s, and long before that. I remember a guy who raced Fireballs back
in the 1960s who built a Fireball with "turret daggerboards" which was
a set-up very similar to modern cassette rudders. The poblem he had
was the loading on a fast planing dinghy exceeded commonly available
home-brew materials back then. Too much deflection in any control
linkage he could build made it impossible to control it finely enough.

Plus the Fireball is a complex boat to sail, givng the skipper & crew
yet one more task to concentrate on was not an improvement.

As for controlling canoe-like hulls by balance, check out the St
Lawrence skiffs.

http://books.google.com/books?id=axf...esult#PPA58,M1

or
http://tinyurl.com/6dupkp

The "Rudder Like Butter" might be nice but is it really an improvement
on "No Rudder At All"?

Fresh Breezes- Doug King