Thanks for the discussion Bill!...I can go to bed now as for I have 'learnt' my thing for the day. Seriously - that was fun. Now I just need a tubing bender for that 2" OD aluminum tubing and to figure out a way to get out on that 2.5' rack without killing myself. 
Its not all that hard...
Ok, maybe it is, took me a couple tries to get out on my wing without inadvertently going off course 
Dan,
There is no rule that says the skipper and crew must always sit on the windward hull. To go fast the skipper and crew, the balast, should sit where ever is necessary to allow the boat to 'fly a hull'. There have been comments on this forum about A cat sailors sitting in the middle of the tramp and 'flying a hull downwind'. Look at some of the righting moment numbers in this thread and you will see that the people on the boat are the major contributors to total righting moment. To go fast the sailors should always place their weight so as to allow the boat to just barely 'fly a hull'.
Good Sailing,
Bill
Very interesting discussion…it is amazing how Mr. Roberts can explain over and over again how things work in the real engineering world, only to have the catamaran community hide it’s head in the sand and ignore the reality of Physics.
Seems, everyone wants a faster boat…BUT…they artificially paint themselves into a corner with self imposed limitations on Length, Width, Weight, and Sail area, Mast height…etc… You know one of the definitions of insanity is “one who wants to do things the same way they have always done them, but achieve different results.
I am starting to come to the conclusion that “racing rules” have done more to harm the development of boat design, be it power or sail…mono hull or multi hull…than any other factor. To get a very good handle on this topic read “Seaworthiness, The Forgotten Factor” By C.A. Marchaj. It talks about how racing rules have driven ocean going Mono Hulls farther and farther away from seaworthy designs, as designers have gone to extremes to “cheat” the rules…he speaks of how many of today’s mono hull designs have little to do with what is “best” at sea…and everything to do with twisting design perimeters, forcing them to design in a self imposed box. All for the elusive carrot of ‘fair racing”. Which for all practical purposes will never be achieved 100% …
Some where along the line things went way off track…no longer is it about designing and building the best boat regardless of limitations. “Trailing width” has become one of the “all powerful” limiting factors of Catamaran design. I find it amazing that everyone pretty much acknowledges this fact, and accepts it without protest. Instead of limiting “on the water” performance because of trailering…why not attack the real problem…the transportation of the boat to the water.
It appears that SC/ARC has made great strides in that direction, but the majority seem easily defeated by this problem… so quick to “roll over and play dead”. We sent a man to the moon, are you going to tell me we can’t come up with a better solution in transporting a 400 lb. boat?
I find it very sad that the designers of true innovation and superior products (like Mr. Roberts) who strive for the “best” within practical limits…who refuse to be put in a box…find limited commercial success, while those who are more adept at marketing than design/engineering, fair much better in the economic arena.
I will venture to say that until the catamaran community is willing to shake off its self imposed chains of “racing design rules” (which I don’t see happening), it will be artificially frozen in the doldrums of mediocrity.
The 38-year-old Tornado Catamaran’s current level of performance when compared to the “latest and greatest” drives this point home with undeniable clarity.
In our new “ politically correct” society”… we have come to expect that things will conform to “our reality”. Unfortunately…or dare I say fortunately…physics has some frustrating lessons for those that choose to ignore it's Laws...
Bob
seeker:
You make several good points, however, I'd just like to point out that I would, in an instant without hesitation trade my H17 up for a tornado in any condition, if it was narrow enough to safely trailer around. You have to factor in transportation into your sailing experience, if your boat doesn't even make it to the water, theres little point in trying to argue about its hydrodynamics.
Hello Maugan17,
Most wide boats can be taken apart by removing 8 bolts, 2 at each end of each beam. Then the hulls and beams rolled up in the tramp are loaded onto a trailer with the hulls sitting side by side. The sails and rudders go in the sail box. It is no big deal.
In 1978 I came out with a boat 20ft x 12ft, the SC20. The beams telescoped from 8ft wide out to 12ft. The tramp stayed on the hulls and beams. The rudders stayed on the hulls. It took 20 minutes to go from 8ft wide to 12ft wide with mast up. The boat had a PN of 60 without spinnaker.
It was a great family boat and it was also the fastest production beach cat ever built. Have you ever heard of this boat?
Bill
If trailing width is THE rule framing all comercially designed beach cats, then the "ideal beach cat" needs a new and more user friendly folding system to feature a larger width without sacrificing trailerability. Reducing the dry docking area needed in beaches and clubs also helps.
Note that small cabin multihulls not much bigger then beach cats boomed after different folding systems were developed 20 years ago, notably the Farrier system.
Would a scaled down folding system help? It's hard to imagine a Farrier folding system in a beach cat, but maybe the swing-wing system could be adapted with relative ease. The extra length would not help, though: a folded ARC 30 would result too long for trailing without a permit - but still easier to assemble. Maybe a "swing-float" ARC22?
Anyway, I agree with the "no rules" approach to multihull design. Faster, safer, and cheaper is better. And that's it.
Sounds like the system that the H21SE uses to telescope its beam.
I have heard of the SC20. While I realize that it doesn't take THAT much more effort, it is awefully nice to just heave up the stick and off you go.
I'm still leaning towards getting a tornado at this point.
I see nothing wrong with the telescoping beams on the SC20...we have several in our club. This system works very well unless you take into account the width of the few boat ramps we have to use. Then you might consider a way to extend the beams once on the water.
I am surely not an authority here, but I do have some comments that I think are uselful.
Even though I have facilitated the one man righting of a H21SE, I have never seen either a H21SE nor a SC20 being expanded from trailering width to sailing width.
But I would like to point out one thing that is quite obvious to me, that a H21SE is very difficult to expand to its sailing width.
While many cats, including the Stilleto 27 and the SC20 have straight cross-beams, the H21SE has curved cross-beams. They are cured as if they belonged to a TheMightyHobie18.
My bottom line:
Expanding a boat with beams that are curved, has got to be a VERY difficult manuever!!!!
GARY
I would think it would be obvious that the beams would be straight unless the benefit of curved (arched beams) locked at 8'-6" could provide an advantage superior to the advantage gained by increasing the width of the platform with a extendible beams. Let form follow function.
Bob
Hello Jake and Gary-
There is a price to pay for wide beamed boats in my experience. When I first bought my FMS 20[restickered Supercat 20 by Boston Whaler according to the rep who found the boat for me in Jupiter, Fla.] in 1981. It had an expandable trailer with a winch to spread it out and pull it together. Unless you greased the pulleys everytime this trailer would bind. The trailer I have for my ARC22 is expandable but has no cables. You simply pick up a hull and walk it out. It takes a couple of pulls on each end to get a hull fully out but its alot easier than the one with cables. It aligns well most of the time. I usually put it together singlehanded because I always pay close attention to details. It takes awhile to complete the task. I have a place where I can leave it on the trailer fully assembled thats close to the lake. Don Caldwell has nade a tilt trailer for his SC20. He said he can be on the water in 45 minutes which is very quick. I may get one of those myself. There's nothing like sailing a wide beamed boat once you get a chance to try it... you won't want to go back.
thom
Telescoping beams work but it is hard to say that they are user friendly. I was always finding excuses not to trailer the SC21 because I disliked the system so much. It jams easily with sand, the bolts were difficult to remove, parts got lost...
The reason I favor some kind of swinging beam system is that it could also be used in the water. Maybe somehting like the X folding beams shown in the last MM, page 20 (Cat 2 Fold). It doesn't need to lower the mast to fold.
Hi All
Good posts ,
Raced the H-21 for a year and traveled around the country with it for events ,-
The telescoping beams were not a problem at all ,--though you needed to be carefull around sand as it would cause binding .-We generally set up in parking lots or grass areas.
The added wings to the extended beam were great also ,though you had to be sure to tie them in ,
the spin block was mounted on the wing end and could be pulled out by the force which would result in a wing flying around at the end on a spin sheet line ,-
The physics problem of the 21 was its huge overall weight,
the comptip mast was very heavy also , to lift and take down .
quick story -
On one mast take down in Newport ,I had gotten a large gash on my hand during Sat races that required stitches ,
we raced Sun ,-me with a duct taped right hand in high winds and a huge chop from enormous amounts of boat traffic from spectators and the jazz festival going on .
With the mast that heavy and tall and one hand good was a bad combination , half way down the base popped off its base and started down pivoting on my shoulder with me fighting it the whole way ,---For some reason the gr crew thought they could catch it before it hit ,--yelled let it go ,--but too late ,--they ended up with a fractured wrist . -Rough wek for al of us.
We had one on a trap wire on each side ,--but from then on we always attached a rope and winch .
Do really appreciate the light C F masts available to use now ,-hopefully costs will continue to come down for them .
Wanted to comment on the rules aspect and how that effects boat design also ,-for cats though ,not monos .
Will add a post there in re -. 
It is too bad that the system used for the Shark catamaran has not been adapted to others. It's a 20-foot-long, 10-foot-wide boat. It folds up in the middle so it looks kind of like a long teepee on the trailer. The folding and unfolding only takes a few minutes. I'm sure there must be some reason why it doesn't work for other boats, since no others have used it. The new Sharks weigh in at minimum weight of (I think) 450 lbs. Maybe the folding system only works because of the hard deck instead of trampoline? Oughta get Shark Builder John Rogers on here to comment. Always seemed to me like a better option than telescope or tilt.
Mary,
Are Sharks still built from molded plywood? It may be that with more modern materials they could weigh in at 400 lbs., as good or better than most 20 footers.
David