Lies, Damned Lies & Statistics

How will the new breed of canoes perform?

There is no clear way of predicting the performance and ease of handling to the
proposed change of rules but maybe the following will give some insight.
The table below was initially generated to try and prove whether the Bethwaites had
developed a superior design of high performance sailing dinghy.
Columns 1-15 are self explanatory and are based on published data for the respective
classes.
Column 19 GYS (Geoffs Yard Stick) is my prediction of the around course speed
equated to the Victorian Yard Stick.
It utilises a well known but very basic formula for predicting the horse power
requirements for planing power boats. The formula incorporates weight, sail area
(horse power), over all length and a constant.
In this case it has been transposed to give a Yardstick figure closely resembling the
VYS.
The formula has a constant representing hull form and as the same constant has been
used for all classes, boats of above average efficiency should show up very clearly.
Of the 24 boats with a VYS and assuming a variation of +/- 2 is acceptable, 10 are in
range, 10 out perform, 4 under perform. This assumes of course that the VYS has
some validity.
Interestingly only one Bethwaite design out performs that is the 29er.
All other out performers with the exception of the Fireball are development classes.
For the most part they are skiff type classes with considerable up wind and downwind
sail area.
The notable exceptions are the Moth and Northbridge Senior. The Northbridge Senior
bears some comparison with the IC in that the MG is the spinnaker version and both
hulls can be sailed in either class.
The Fireballs apparent performance is an aberration I cannot explain, particularly as I
remember consistently beating them with a Cherub in the late 60s. Maybe somebody
can enlighten me.
Note both the current ICs and ACs are average performers, probably because the
conservative sail area versus righting moment.
So were does this get us.
An IC to the new minimum weight will have a predicted yardstick of 87.4 6 points
better than the existing IC and the same as Phil in his modified AC.
A skinny IC has the same figure because the formula has not been adjusted for hull
form.

1
Class

18'
49ER
14'
F.D.
16'
12'
I.C.
I.C.Light
Skinny IC
Skinny
IC+
A.C.
Phil
Musto
RS700
Bucko
Sharpie
B14
505
29ER
Fireball
470
MG
Tasar
Contender
NS14
Cherub
Moth
Laser
Finn
Nat.E
125

2
VYS

68
83
86.5
92.5
86
92
94

87

95
96.5
97
95
101
101
106.5
107.5
107.5
108
106
106.5
112
113
113
123

3
LOA

4
Wt.

5
Helm
Wt

6
Crew
Wt

7
Crew
Wt

80
85
80
90
80
80

80

5486
4990
4267
6050
4877
3658
5180
5180
5180

65
61
61
125
70
45
75
50
50

80
80
80
80
80
80
75
75
75

5180
5180
5180
4550
4680
4290
5990
4250
5050
4450
4900
4700
4300
4420
4850
4267
3657
3353
4230
4500
4600
3830

50
75
75
58
56
55
90
64
127
75
79
80
64
68
80
64
50
35
59
105
97
50

75
75
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
65
80
80
80
80
80
75
75
80
80
80
80
75

4% plus better than GYS

Canoe Family
Good Correlation
2% plus worse than GYS

80
80
80
65
80
80
65
60
50
75

75
65

80

85

8
Total
Crew
+
Hull
305
226
221
295
310
205
150
125
125

9
D/L

10.97
13.68
21.88
15.73
16.82
25.62
15.04
10.02
10.02

125
150
155
138
136
135
335
224
287
205
239
240
209
208
160
189
200
115
139
185
252
190

10.02
15.04
15.04
17.16
15.22
19.41
11.67
23.23
27.48
23.72
18.71
21.47
22.43
21.94
19.54
22.95
28.49
25.87
21.72
32.11
27.77
24.80

10
D/L
with
Crew
51.47
50.68
79.27
37.12
74.47
116.70
30.07
25.06
25.06
25.06
30.07
31.07
40.82
36.97
47.65
43.43
81.31
62.10
64.82
56.61
64.41
73.25
67.12
39.08
67.79
113.95
85.01
51.17
56.57
72.14
94.24
61.82

11
Beam

12
Wing

13
S.A.

14
R.M.

15
RM/SA

19
GYS

1690
1840
1700
1520
1800
1010
1010
850

4270
2900
1840
1700
1780
1500
2010
2010
2010

32.0
21.2
18.6
15.0
22.0
21.0
10.0
10.0
10.0

485.6
387.8
291.2
225.5
285.6
264.0
150.8
150.8
150.8

15.2
18.3
15.7
15.0
13.0
12.6
15.1
15.1
15.1

72.3
81.8
93.4
92.8
92.4
94.5
93.6
87.4
87.4

850
1010
1010
1350
1920
1500
1440
1670
1880
1770
1400
1600
1830
1750
1500
1860
1800
400
1420
1510
1600
1430

2110
2010
2010
2350
2330
2565
1440
3180
1880
1770
1400
1600
1830
1750
1500
1860
1800
2250
1420
1510
1600
1430

11.0
10.0
12.0
11.5
12.8
11.0
16.5
17.2
16.3
13.2
11.4
14.0
9.3
11.4
10.0
9.3
11.2
8.0
7.1
10.0
12.5
9.5

158.3
150.8
160.8
166.0
165.2
174.6
252.9
254.4
222.4
173.6
184.0
200.0
191.2
122.5
132.0
116.3
202.5
90.0
56.8
132.4
191.5
158.6

14.4
15.1
13.4
14.4
12.9
15.9
15.3
14.8
13.7
13.2
16.1
14.3
20.6
10.7
13.2
12.5
18.1
11.3
8.0
13.2
15.3
16.7
14.9

84.0
91.5
86.5
90.6
85.1
94.2
94.2
96.5
97.9
99.7
104.2
100.2
111.4
107.0
98.9
111.6
111.7
112.0
111.9
106.7
105.8
112.9
Add 2.3%
If No
Spinnaker

20
VYS

21
Diff
GYSVYS

68.0
83.0
86.5
92.5
86.0
92.0
94.0

4.3
-1.2
6.9
0.3
6.4
2.5
-0.4

87.0

-0.5

95.0
96.5
97.0
95.0
101.0
101.0
106.5
107.5
107.5
108.0
106.0
106.5
112.0
113.0
113.0
123.0

-0.8
0.0
0.9
4.7
3.2
-0.8
4.9
-0.5
-8.6
3.6
5.7
5.5
-0.1
-6.3
-7.2
-10.1

Assuming development takes the usual course and based on the Northbridge Senior
experience a yardstick of 84 should be possible. This will most likely require hard
chine hulls (spray break away) and airfoil rotating rigs and most likely T foil rudders
to reduce pitching and nose diving.
Looking at the Righting Moment versus Sail Area an increase to 11 sq m is feasible
with an increase of 100 to 150mm in plank length. These increases could end up with
an IC at 80.

How will it handle

The table below compares the righting moment hull only and wetted surface of
various hulls including a Musto look alike (MLA).
Note the incredible form stability of the MLA.
The skinny IC is a bit tenderer than the existing IC but with carbon fibre masts and
light weight planks is probably comparable to an IC with aluminium mast and heavy
plank. Further calculations will be carried out
Note the wetted surfaces in all cases are similar. The difference arises in the ability of
spray to break away from the hull surface either via a chine or high rise in hull cross
section curve. In the case of the MLA it probably sticks to the hull increasing
resistance.
Wt. WS 0

WS 5

WS 10

WS 15

RM 5

RM 10

RM 15

MLA

140 3.154

2.944

2.697

2.337

21.014

35.494

45.93

IC

160

3.090

2.806

2.826

2.674

11.166

20.565

28.868

IC Skinny*

120

2.678

2.414

2.496

2.391

7.657

14.132

19.491

A Cat

125

2.684

2.271

2.084

2.079

144

151

151

WS = wetted surface at x angle of heel sq m

RM= righting moment of hull only at x angle of heel - kgm
* Refer design below

IC Fat Arse

What to do with your old IC

Put on a sliding seat fore and aft and go for a row.