• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Blaze720

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

979 profile views
  1. Blaze720

    New Olympic Dinghy Selection

    Well Done RS Aero .... Not my sort of boat but it is a brilliant product overall and by far the best being considered (and yes I have sailed/raced three of them!)
  2. Blaze720

    Can we save Portsmouth handicap racing?

    Life is too short for this sort of thing – it is looking like an indulgent or unnecessary diversion. One where there will never be a ‘last word’ as long as people keep responding. If you don’t want to take part in a particular format for any particular reason best known to yourself well that is just dandy - and if you do well I guess ditto. Class racing is great .. alongside other alternative formats and they are not mutually exclusive. ‘Each to their own’ ... nuff said ?
  3. Blaze720

    Can we save Portsmouth handicap racing?

    So it seems 'fairness' can be just about anything you want it to be then !! So there is nothing wrong ( 'unfair') with development classes throwing money at development, and gaining (arguably unfair) advantage ? So there can be nothing unfair in anything else or alternative racing format by extension as you know what you getting involved with etc etc . So to complete the circular argument there can be nothing wrong with handicap racing either. It is not only 'fair' because as just one individual you, he, or she 'say so' .... You know the rules, format, implications in advance with handicap racing just as you do with other formats ... and are not forced to participate. Heck nobody is even trying to persuade the 'unconvinced' so why do some still deride the 'fairness' of others ? ... or is 'fairness' simply something 'we' pratice and is 'unfairness' something those deluded 'others' just do ? ... You can't have it both ways.
  4. Blaze720

    Can we save Portsmouth handicap racing?

    Well, define fair? ..... Well it ain't ever found in development class racing for a start using the same logic. In additon single class racing in anything other than 'issued' totally identical boats/sails can be similarly considered 'unfair' as well - ideally all should be from the same production batch, age etc etc .... so what is ever truly 'fair' in that glass house world of the total purist ? Lighen up ... nobody is forced to race in multi-class handicap races. Don't like it ? Move on and out of the way of those that do recognise it has a very valid place alongside other modes.
  5. Blaze720


    If we were talking about a Catamaran or any other reference with a proven system that works better, it's worth talking about - but not this. But then again we are of course .... and even proven variants of same from the same designers .. on foiling cats. Additional complexity is only usually worth employing in engineering terms if it is needed, the rest of the time of course the optimum design route is inevitably the 'KISS' one.
  6. Blaze720


    Control feedback and effects can vary enormously from structure to structure and are not necessarily easy to totally generalise about. As has been suggested already while there are some general principles to consider the real world is usually much more complex. One structure may has tendancies where control oscillations can quickly arise and increase in frequency / magnitude while others dampen things down just as quickly. Proportional only control feedbacks have obvious limitations and full P+I or even PID is not fully practical without today a bit of processor power and a bit more sensing that possible with just a simple 'wand'. So not very usable with small boats unless a lot more 'technology' was introduced / permitted ! So if your structure itself is more 'stable' (tolerant) across the range of conditons life can be easier allround. I'm sure todays Moth setup is a long way towards optimum after the huge amount of practical experience there .. for the Moth. It may even be optimum on some other structures as well. The question though is whether it is as needed or essential to provide good or appropriate control with all other structures with their very different characteristics and behaviours. It might simply not be a question of 'either/or' at all Camber inducers or 'not' ?..... rotating masts or .not' ? (or maybe over-rotating ones ?).... daggerboards or centreboards ? ... fully battened or 'semi' fully-battened ? One hull or two ? (or even 3 !) The list is seemingly endless. The point is that all these are choices or options that do 'work' with good application.....
  7. Blaze720


    This looks like a non-argument ... 101 is a one-design and ultimate speed never was the key objective. ALL classes are sets of compromises. You could just as easily point out its weight to suggest it is possibly 'sub-optimal' and half a dozen other issues. But I'd be pretty certain it is plenty fast enough for its target market and pretty damn fast in absolute terms as well. If it is also simple and relatively forgiving that cannot be a bad thing. It may be ideal for those who currently regard the Moth as not on their radar at all. For that matter I'm sure some here could point to the Moth itself and suggest 'sub-optimal' compromises have had to be made there as well - to keep within its class rules. For example the 11 foot limit which has been twisted over the years and eerm .... perhaps 'adjusted' in less than a few subtle ways - rudder gantries and other extensions etc over the bows for instance. Are these admissions that the 11 foot idea was 'sub-optimal' in the first place ? Would it matter in the slightest anyway ? Foiling itself is very much a small minority interest at the moment. If it is to grow long term beyond relative token numbers it needs for additonal foiling classes to become established, prosper, and attract new blood. Some foilers and 'wantabe' foilers themselves can appear on this forum and others to almost be their own worst enemies !! Good luck to all of them would be my own take ....
  8. Blaze720


    The F101 uses the same approach as 'Whisper' ... seems to go fine to me. Same wand approach and you can see the family similarity easily enough. Have a look .......
  9. Blaze720

    The VX Evo

    Fine bow layup is not that difficult frankly - The 'glass' (or similar) can naturally ends up 'short' of the bow dufing layup. You wrap it around the pointy end ... but you then use a simple narrow wood 'batten' (can be glass / carbon) that is pushed /tapped right up into the bow taking the fibre/weave with it. . The 'pusher' is then left there and incorporated into the structure... result one very strong but fine edged bow without voids or lack of 'proper' structure.. If you don't do it this way or have a workable alternative you will have problems for sure. We've been doing it this way for some time as have a number of Cat producers and it at least avoids having to produce other parts that in turn need to be attached. The other reason for possibly going for an 'add on later' nose assembly is to make release from the mould tooling easier. But there are plenty of other tricks available allowing fine bows to release easily as well ... ;-) But there is always more than one way to do most things .... Cirrus .....