• Announcements

    • UnderDawg

      A Few Simple Rules   05/22/2017

      Sailing Anarchy is a very lightly moderated site. This is by design, to afford a more free atmosphere for discussion. There are plenty of sailing forums you can go to where swearing isn't allowed, confrontation is squelched and, and you can have a moderator finger-wag at you for your attitude. SA tries to avoid that and allow for more adult behavior without moderators editing your posts and whacking knuckles with rulers. We don't have a long list of published "thou shalt nots" either, and this is by design. Too many absolute rules paints us into too many corners. So check the Terms of Service - there IS language there about certain types of behavior that is not permitted. We interpret that lightly and permit a lot of latitude, but we DO reserve the right to take action when something is too extreme to tolerate (too racist, graphic, violent, misogynistic, etc.). Yes, that is subjective, but it allows us discretion. Avoiding a laundry list of rules allows for freedom; don't abuse it. However there ARE a few basic rules that will earn you a suspension, and apparently a brief refresher is in order. 1) Allegations of pedophilia - there is no tolerance for this. So if you make allegations, jokes, innuendo or suggestions about child molestation, child pornography, abuse or inappropriate behavior with minors etc. about someone on this board you will get a time out. This is pretty much automatic; this behavior can have real world effect and is not acceptable. Obviously the subject is not banned when discussion of it is apropos, e.g. talking about an item in the news for instance. But allegations or references directed at or about another poster is verboten. 2) Outing people - providing real world identifiable information about users on the forums who prefer to remain anonymous. Yes, some of us post with our real names - not a problem to use them. However many do NOT, and if you find out someone's name keep it to yourself, first or last. This also goes for other identifying information too - employer information etc. You don't need too many pieces of data to figure out who someone really is these days. Depending on severity you might get anything from a scolding to a suspension - so don't do it. I know it can be confusing sometimes for newcomers, as SA has been around almost twenty years and there are some people that throw their real names around and their current Display Name may not match the name they have out in the public. But if in doubt, you don't want to accidentally out some one so use caution, even if it's a personal friend of yours in real life. 3) Posting While Suspended - If you've earned a timeout (these are fairly rare and hard to get), please observe the suspension. If you create a new account (a "Sock Puppet") and return to the forums to post with it before your suspension is up you WILL get more time added to your original suspension and lose your Socks. This behavior may result a permanent ban, since it shows you have zero respect for the few rules we have and the moderating team that is tasked with supporting them. Check the Terms of Service you agreed to; they apply to the individual agreeing, not the account you created, so don't try to Sea Lawyer us if you get caught. Just don't do it. Those are the three that will almost certainly get you into some trouble. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DO ONE OF THESE THINGS, please do the following: Refrain from quoting the offending text, it makes the thread cleanup a pain in the rear Press the Report button; it is by far the best way to notify Admins as we will get e-mails. Calling out for Admins in the middle of threads, sending us PM's, etc. - there is no guarantee we will get those in a timely fashion. There are multiple Moderators in multiple time zones around the world, and anyone one of us can handle the Report and all of us will be notified about it. But if you PM one Mod directly and he's off line, the problem will get dealt with much more slowly. Other behaviors that you might want to think twice before doing include: Intentionally disrupting threads and discussions repeatedly. Off topic/content free trolling in threads to disrupt dialog Stalking users around the forums with the intent to disrupt content and discussion Repeated posting of overly graphic or scatological porn content. There are plenty web sites for you to get your freak on, don't do it here. And a brief note to Newbies... No, we will not ban people or censor them for dropping F-bombs on you, using foul language, etc. so please don't report it when one of our members gives you a greeting you may find shocking. We do our best not to censor content here and playing swearword police is not in our job descriptions. Sailing Anarchy is more like a bar than a classroom, so handle it like you would meeting someone a little coarse - don't look for the teacher. Thanks.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About SimonN

  • Rank
  • Birthday 06/05/1959

Contact Methods

  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Location
    Sydney ex London
  1. Before I drill into some detail just a couple of questions... It's a given that everyone wants a speed advantage with better height angles upwind and better depth or " Soak down" angle downwind. I' ll take that as a given. So you fail before you even begin. Clearly from this comment alone you don't actually race and all your stuff is totally theoretical, because this is not only not a given, but is very different from what you develop. You need to develop a range of modes in order to be able to race in a fleet. You need a good high mode in order to create a lane or force somebody to tack away. You also need good low mode, maybe to clear your wind or maybe to sail over the fleet to gain control. And then you need a fast "normal" mode for holding a narrow lane. You also need all of those modes because unless you have made the perfect start and cleared the fleet, your options are always influenced by what other boats are doing and as such, if all you have gone for is speed and height, you are going to be stuffed. In the same way, downhill you need a number of modes as well. As for the rest of what you say, I don't think you have posted anything that I wasn't taught at the age of 15 as part of Team GBR youth squads.Why on earth don't you think that the guys in our development group don't spend a lot of time getting boats to be equal, because you cannot properly test until you get the baseline? Do you really think that Olympic medalists, AC sailors and world champions don't know these basics. But why have you missed such important things as the need to also swap boats in order to check that a given improvement isn't just one person sailing the conditions better. You also fail to identify a really important area of development based on the fact that it is rare for everybody in a training group to weigh the same amount. There is a need to be able to ensure any new developments can be used by all in the group. If you know what you are doing, you can very successfully test developments with differences in crew weight. So some of the time you equalise weight, on other occasions, you test at your normal weight. And why do you think that the A Class guys don't spend significant time designing properly. For instance, both main A Class builders have been working with leading designers (either current or ex AC guys) on foils. I use a mix of CFD and virtual wind tunnel software to look at platform aerodynamics. But you can only go so far with that because as has been proven time and again, nobody has good enough models to be able to predict everything correctly, even at AC level. Most importantly in a boat like the A Class, where you do not have instruments and computers (and therefore no polars) on the race course, you need to ensure that settings can be matched to conditions based on feel, so you can go up and down through the gears at the right time and have the boat performing for the specific conditions. Knowing how to do that is a skill in itself. Your comments read like somebody who has learnt some of the theory but who has never done it for real. You make assumptions that are simply wrong and you miss really important stages. But the most extraordinary thing about what you have written is your arrogance, believing that others cannot and have not been doing the development work correctly.
  2. WnW While I appreciate your support and will always have beer with you, can I suggest before posting certain things, you fact check. Ring Stevie and and ask whether I pester him or he pesters me. Ask him who comes up with the development ideas and then come back here and tell us what he says. I might not have been able to sail very much, but there are other ways to contribute to a campaign.
  3. Facts are not personally attacks. Ask your self why Simon does not post in the AC threads anymore.... cause to many guys saw thru his crap! You will figure it out some day! I specifically don't post because of your crap, which probably gives you a kick that I could never understand. I realised that there was no point in posting there any more after a senior AC team member asked me why I bothered when there were idiots like you who added nothing and simply trolled (yes, he specifically named you which again, I am sure gives you some perverted thrill). Now you come onto another forum and spread your crap while adding absolutely nothing of value. Seriously, you have to be a very sad, lonely and defective individual to post the way you do.
  4. I wasn't suggesting that this project would effect the reef. I used it as an illustration of why I do not trust Queensland on any environmental issue and having been told that further dredging to create this new sailing venue will have a detrimental effect on the environment, I am extremely skeptical about any government agency making a decision on this. This is just about the only thing i have against what happens in Australia - the environmental impact on this country is simply unacceptable. And the stupidity of the arguments beggars belief. For instance, how anybody can equate the digging of foundations for a house in Sydney to the dredging of a waterway is beyond me, but it is typical of sort of rebutal you get whenever you point out the atrocious environmental record in Australia.
  5. Based on this post. You are a follower Simon.... and not a leader. How about formulating your own ideas and thoughts instead of asking everbody else about Thiers. Just shows what an ignorant troll you are. It's pretty well documented that I have been one of the people who has been at the forefront of updating older boats and have promoted the conversion of boats since it all started. The difference is that I don't usually feel the need to take credit, but I think it is fair to say that between Stevie Brewin, Mark Johnson and myself, we have done more to test and promote the modification of older boats than anybody else. I have regularly posted photos of my boat showing the conversions, starting with being the first in Oz to convert an older design to the then modern (DNA) C foils, followed by developing and promoting the modification of "narrow" older boats to wider transoms and finally adding "flying" foils. I have always done the work myself and I have since helped a lot of people do their own boats, which is probably why I get so many PM's, emails and skype calls for advice. Some are prepared to help others, while some simply want to hide behind keyboards, type shit and contribute nothing. I wish I could understand what a troll like you gets out of what you do. I understand that not everybody can or wants to spend the time contributing positively, but it must take a certain mental deficiency to get pleasure out of being destructive and negative. Where is the pleasure in trolling?
  6. Simon best not to comment on stuff you know bugger all about. There is huge interest in inshore boating on the GC and a lack of good venues. It's not just about ACWS. The people behind it have grunt and track records in business and sports other than sailing. They are also now very involved in serious sailing ventures and prepared to put money where their mouths are.Good luck to them. I actually do know a hell of a lot about it, having seen initial environmental reports about the damage that would be done to ecosystems in the area. Why doesn't it surprise me that Queensland continues to promote schemes which are disastrous for the environment? The record in the State for environmental damage done by dredging is as bad as you will find anywhere. I have a little sympathy for it when done to support the economy, such as at Gladstone/Curtis Island (which i have visited as part of a fact finding mission for research into environmental damage from dredging), but that sympathy disappears totally when they refuse to use best practice and not only damage local eco-systems, but also significantly endanger the Great Barrier Reef. The proposal highlighted might provide a sailing venue, but there is no justification at all for the environmental damage it would cause. After an initial investigation, done by a friend and now buried, they are now using exactly the same bullshit wording about environmental and sustainable use that we so often see in Queensland projects. When will Queensland learn that major dredging projects cannot be environmentally friendly or sustainable?
  7. Congrats, Gantt. You have managed to get 2 threads that are a total waste of space. I wonder who the troll really is. I would add that while IPLore, Wess, Tiller man and myself don't see eye to eye on the issues, I have zero problems with them, yet you, who comes at the issues from a similar viewpoint to me, I do have a problem with, because of the way you go about your attacks. Seriously, you are the problem, not them.
  8. Wow. What an environmentally friendly and worthwhile idea this is. I am sure it makes great economic sense to do all that dredging and spend all that money in the hope of being able to attract an event that we don't even know will take part (next holder could scrap the ACWS). Surely there are enough really good venues in Australia to make the effort somewhere that you don't need to spend many millions of dollars just to be able to attempt to attract events.
  9. In Oz, it is pretty well established that the cost of getting a professional to convert a boat is $4000, plus parts. Having said that, this is for fitting a full case, which is more work than the approach most now take. Instead of a "proper case, people are simply installing 2 bulkheads about 250-300mm apart, say 50mm less than the length of the slider plate (this gives room for different foils and playing with foil position later). This involves cutting out a fairly large bit of deck, which you keep to glue back in. You need to cut out the sandwich material in the area the foil will go through the hull and lay up some new material so that the area is solid, tapering out the new material to spread the load into the hull Then simply cut the hole through the new, thicker area. Then glue cack in the piece of deck and laminate over it to ensure it is strong. Finally, fit the top plate. Many are now bolting that in place so that it can be removed to get your hand in to change the exit slot for new foils. Done right, there should be no need to make good any paint or gel coat. Stevie Brewin has done this to at least 4 boats and got it down to something like a few evenings of work, with my guess being something like under 10 hours of actual labour. The hardest job is making the template for the bulkheads and ensuring they are fully bonded in all round, otherwise you get leaks! I haven't heard of any boat that cannot b converted. The narrowest boat I know of, which is the Flyer 1, had no issue while I also know of somebody who converted an A3. It is best to lay the foils out on the ground to take measurements in order to work out where the top and bottom openings need to be in order to acheive something that complies with the class rules.
  10. So, I have spoken to 4 different sailors from 3 different countries, in order to get a balanced view of the recent worlds. Here is my summation of what I have been told. While it is always tough to critisise organisers of an event, particularly if you weren't there, the one theme that comes through is that this wasn't the greatest championship. Conditions did mean that some got lucky, while others suffered. Mischa certainly got lucky, in as far as he avoided sailing in the light conditions at all, the only one of the top of the fleet to do so. Everybody I spoke to suggested that while Mischa was the best sailor in the races he sailed, if he had sailed in the light races, the overall result could have been very different. Some are very upset about how the fleets were allocated so that some only sailed in the light wind qualifying while others only sailed in more wind, when it was clear what was going on with the wind and it would have been possible to allocate the fleets fairly. However, 2 comments stand out. First, Stevie said he was pleased that Mischa was so dominant in the gold fleet because it was clear he was the best gold fleet sailor, but if it had been close, his "luck" in avoiding the light wind races would have caused some question the result, which would have been wrong. Darren Bundock stated very clearly that Mischa was the best sailor at the regatta in the races he sailed. So Mischa's closest rivals seem to have OK with what happened, although they do believe it could be improved while those lower down the fleet seemed far vocal in the matter. What I have a bit of an issue with was the fact that races were run in winds lower than the minimum wind speed the class lays down. This was done to keep the event on schedule, but I believe that it significantly prejudiced a few sailors. Having said that, i know that there is going to be a review of how the A's run the worlds, to avoid avoid problems with split fleets in the future. What I had not realised was that the regatta was really a pretty light wind affair. Leaving aside the very light wind races, the races in the gold fleet were still sailed in fairly moderate breeze. I get the impression that it was very rarely over 12 knots. Again, this seems to have had in impact on the results, with some suggesting it could have been different if there had been 15-18 knots. What everybody said was that Mischa was the fastest sailor there, particularly upwind. They all put it down to a combination of 2 things, his weight and the way he sailed. Mischa was 20 kgs heavier than Bundy and 15kgs heavier than Stevie. Upwind, in sea hugging mode and marginal foiling, it gave him a big advantage. It seems pretty clear that being heavy helps you get foiling sooner, both upwind and downhill. There was a feeling that once everybody was flying upwind, the Exploder got faster with reports that befor ethe regatta, in 18 knots, Mischa was slower than the fastest Exploders. How much of this is rig, how much is foils and how much is weight is hard to tell - Mischa's sail is seriously powerful compared with the Brewin and maybe in the windier stuff, that hurts him. The Exploder boys are very happy with their boats,in terms of how they are working, their strength and their weight. Having said that, the concern is over rudders, which have become longer and thinner - Stevie broke one, but overall, the boats were good. I think it is fair to say that some of the new DNA's had teething issues, with some boats needing a lot of ongoing "support" from the factory. It's probably wrong to draw too many conclusions from that, because it really is second hand info. As reported elsewhere, the new DNA's were on the heavier side of those weighed, over 80 kgs and up to 84, while the new Exploders weighed between 77 and 79 kgs. The extra weight clearly didn't slow Mischa down! As mentioned before, the DNA foils are further forward than the Exploder ones. There is a bit of debate about this, with some feeling that the DNA was harder to foil (but not for Mischa!). With the Exploder having moved their foils about 100mm forward compared with the "old" boat, it was reported that it did feel different and took a bit of time to get used to, but it was unclear if it is better or just different. We will know more in September when we can properly run the new boats against a proven old boat in proper trials. So to specific bits of gear. Those in "Team Brewin" will not be adding booms to their sails any time soon. They were very happy with their rigs. The straight, short traveller got mixed reviews. Bundy was very happy with his and would not go back. Stevie Brewin is less sure, because of what happened to him in the super light races, although he did say that in Aussie conditions, you don't need a full curved traveller. So while Bundy and I talked about how you could do away with the traveller all together (to save weight), Stevie is thinking of going back to the full curved one! Bundy was pleased with his rudder rake adjustment system, but Stevie ran out of time to set his up. Stevie needed to do some much work to get his boat on the water, claiming something like 50 hours or work, although I suspect that in reality, it was more like 35! Even still, he ended up not fitting certain systems because of time. Even Bundy ran out of time. One of teh interesting systems that didn't make it to the race course was hiding all the purchase for the mainsheet "inside" the tramp. There are photos of it on Stevie's boat, but he got worried that with the short traveller, he didn't have enough sheet to ease so went back to a conventional system. This will b e something that is worked on later in the year. And if people have been paying close attention to the photos that have been posted on various sources, the traveller control line has been taken forward and they no longer have the cleat on the mainsheet car. This needs further refinement, but clears away some of the rope. Talking about rudders, and as said above, rudders are getting deeper and thinner. This means they are also getting harder to build light, and from conversations I have had, I believe that this will need to be addressed. I think we will see a move towards high-modulus carbon and more expense, plus probably slightly heavier foils. This is a pattern of development seen in the Moths, as the importance of foil stiffness becomes clearer. Let's hope foils don't end up costing Moth prices! Overall, I think both DNA and Exploder will be pretty happy with where they are. There is no doubt that the DNA's are beautiful boats, but I personally want to see what one looks like in a year. For me, I cannot justify spending that sort of money when the Exploder is as good as it is. I don't think that Mischa would swap to Exploder or Stevie and Bundy would swap to DNA. That has to be good for the class, because there is a choice of builder. One final thought. I asked Bundy about helmets, because i need to buy one and did he think I should get one. He has actually recommended to the class that they are made compulsory, and not just for foilers. His belief is that the most likely head injury will come in a collision, and that is just as likely between a foiler and non foiler. Closing speeds are now getting scary and his biggest issue was when lapping people. Controversial, I know, but you cannot argue with his experience that he cannot make an informed opinion. So I personally am more excited than ever to get out on the water. Fun times ahead. I know it is very much second hand information, and I have tried not to add my spin, but I am fortunate to have these guys as friends and sailing partners and, as always, i am happy to share.
  11. No evidence at all. I didn't see any pictures or hear of anybody lifting their rudders up in light weather because they had the cassettes. It is problematic for a number of reasons. First, iot doesn't take much more wind for you to need the rudders fully down, so you need to be 100% confident that you are not going to see a change in wind strength. In reality, if races are sailed in the class minimum wind, you would not choose to lift your rudders. Doing it during the race would give up a fair amount of ground. I really don't see it as an issue. I am interested in why you prefer L foils. I am sure Exploder will sell you them if you want swing ones, but I am not sure why you would buy the Exploder L's when their T's are proven to be faster. It is probably true that the L's are slightly easier to foil with in marginal stuff, but their advantage is in such a narrow wind band that it really isn't worth going with it. I have just spoken to the last person I wanted to check in with before writing anything, so will now try to write a round up from the worlds based on what 4 different sailors have said to me, although the picture is slightly blurred because they don't 100% agree!
  12. I am going to do a longer post over the weekend as i have spoken to 3 people who were at the event, but there is still one more person to speak to. However, in response to your questions I have been trying to tell people for ages that converted boats can be just as fast as purpose built boats. Stevie Brewin did all his training for the worlds on a converted DNA. In addition, his converted Nikita was a weapon. He has won events in converted boats.
  13. I haven't got any measurements, but discussing it last night, it seems that the DNA has its boards most forward. The new exploder has them about a board width further forward than the old boat, while the DNA is another board width further forward again. Although not to be taken as any definitive, a measurement of 400mm from the front beam was mentioned. I believe that the front beams are somewhere around the "old school" measurement of 2750mm from the transom. I will try to get definitive figures ASAP.
  14. Stevie Brewin was achieving similar speeds at times before he went to the worlds, in about 12-14 knots and the angles are only a few degrees off a non foiling boat. I think you need to start a bit lower, but as speed builds, you can come back up. Overall, I don't think it is that much different from if you decided to foot off for speed in the old days. However, the less skilled sailor can lose a lot of distance by being too low and not being able to come up. Bundy reported that Mischa had a speed advantage upwind that he put down to weight, claiming close to 20kgs difference between Mischa and himself. I suspect that the lighter A Class sailor will need to do some work to be able to overcome the issues of the higher apparent wind speeds upwind foiling produces.
  15. Funny you should make the comments you do, because every class I have ever been on the exec of have a very different point of view, and that includes Olympic classes. World Championships should never just be about the "Creme de la Creme". The moment you forget about the the sailors who aren't in that group is the moment that you start to kill the class. This is why even Olympic classes have 3 out of every 4 worlds as open events (one worlds per cycle is a multi world, IAAF event where numbers are lmited because of running racing for 10 classes). I believe that open worlds were vital to the success of the 49er in the early days, with something like 130+ boats at the first worlds held in Europe. And it isn't just the back of the fleet that think the events should be open. I would like to quote Lawrie Smith from one of the books he wrote. For those who don't know, Lawrie is an Olympic medalist, AC helm and multi-class world champion. He said And if IIRC, when the matter of open championships came up in the A's at an Oz AGM, one of the most vocal for it was Glen Ashby. Not only do top sailors recognise this, but also so does ISAF, who encourage open championships. A world championships is about an opportunity for members of a class to gather together and share their passion with other like minded people. There are even A Class people who have even gone to worlds when unable or unwilling to sail, so as to see their friends who they have known for years but see so infrequently. It is a big attraction to be part of a class that has championships all over the world and people do join the A's for that reason. What is so crazy about this discussion is that limiting entries should never come up, because you can organise good events with split fleets. Surely if split fleets are good enough for so many other major classes, it's good enough for the A's.