Unsubscribe please! Kind regards, Capt. Kozar --- deering@ak.net wrote: From: Robert Deering <deering@ak.net> To: 'Power Catamaran List' <power-catamaran@lists.samurai.com> Subject: Re: [PCW] PDQ 41 drawings Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 20:21:10 -0900 I agree Henry, thanks for posting. Very interesting reading. This Ted Clements statement caught my eye: "The single most important accommodation specification demanded of the PDQ 41 was the "walk around bed" and achieving this one feature drove the entire initial design." I've voiced my opinion about the bridgedeck cabin before, but I still think that letting this particular feature drive the entire design of the boat seems like the 'tail wagging the dog' to me. I guess that explains why I'm in engineering and not marketing. Bob Deering Juneau Alaska -----Original Message----- From: power-catamaran-bounces+deering=ak.net@lists.samurai.com [mailto:power-catamaran-bounces+deering=ak.net@lists.samurai.com] On Behalf Of bob Austin Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 2:04 PM To: power-catamaran@lists.samurai.com Subject: [PCW] PDQ 41 drawings Thanks for the referal to the links. Very nice drawings. One item which is not entirely clear in the drawings is the visability aft from the lower helm. Is there a window to the saloon from the stb stateroom? There does seem to be a window on the outside of the aft stateroom. This design is one which seems to get rid of my objection of a crawl over the partner bunk. One item which is disconcerting to an offshore sailor is the loss of positive stability at 64.5 degrees of heel in a light boat condition. (Yep I know that many motor yachts are less stable than that and that my Tom Cat is probably less stable--but I would not cross an ocean in a Tom Cat.) At least with a sailing cat, there can be mast floatation to hold the boat at close to 90 degrees. Bob Austin _______________________________________________ Power-Catamaran Mailing List _______________________________________________ Power-Catamaran Mailing List