SimonN

Members
  • Content Count

    10,327
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

235 F'n Saint

1 Follower

About SimonN

  • Rank
    Super Anarchist
  • Birthday 06/05/1959

Profile Information

  • Location
    Sydney ex London

Recent Profile Visitors

21,088 profile views
  1. SimonN

    head like a hole

    No. Goodie called the squall and said the safer option was to bear away and gybe. It was a poor decision by Barker. Why he made that decision is another matter.
  2. SimonN

    head like a hole

    Again, you show your lack of knowledge of this type of sailing. They went into the bear away down speed. They had just tacked and were not going at 40+ knots. They were going low 20's when they begun the bear away, which is very much down speed. The problems with most high performance, over canvassed boats bearing away is the difference between the speed you go into that bear away and the speed you come out - the bigger the difference, the more difficult it is. This is why Goodie wanted they to do a bear away, gybe. They would have come in a little hot (deliberately), so something like 34/5 knots and they would have accelerated to, say, 45 knots a difference of 10 knots which is nice and manageable. Instead, they came in down speed and in a very short period, went from low 20's to 45 knots. You see the stern lift significantly, too much for the flight controller to correct, until the rudder winglets stall and the arse comes down, increasing the angle of attack of the main foils so the boat leaps out. At this time, the apparent wind is still well forward of the beam, probably from about the same direction as upwind (note how when you watch most bear aways in this class their sails don't really ease). Then the boat comes crashing down, almost stops and the apparent wind swings aft, by about 150 degrees - no forward motion means that the apparent and true wind become one and the same. You the have 2 problems. The first is that it is impossible to ease the sails fast enough to stop the inevitable. The second is that even if you can, these boats are not designed to go downwind at that sort of wind angle and the main cannot be eased enough. From the moment they lost the rudder, they were doomed. In 10 knots less wind, they might have got away with it but with that squirt, no chance. That is why Goodie didn't want to do the tack, bear away. The most experienced foiler on the boat knew what might happen, and he was right. It's actually not a lot different to the cause of the ETNZ capsize. They went into the gybe slower after a touchdown, rig loaded up, apparent swung aft and they were pushed over their bow. The problem was being downspeed and the apparent swinging aft. In the case of ETNZ, they eased their main as far as it could go and that didn't help at all because by then, it was too late and the apparent was too far behind. I would say that a significant majority of foiler capsizes are due to that sudden shift in apparent wind direction from the boat slowing quickly, and in almost all cases, there is little you can do once the events begin and you are just along for the ride.
  3. SimonN

    head like a hole

    The issue wasn't the runner. Even with the runner fully eased they would have gone over. The problem was going from the slow speed into the mark rounding, As they accelerated downwind, they went from a slow speed to very fast (I have read 45 knots), which meant the foils increased their lift (due to the higher speed) faster that the flight controller could adjust for it. At that point, easing the sail would have made the boat jump out more. On foilers, easing the sails unloads the foils and the bow rises, pulling in pushes the bow down (the exact opposite of a non foiling boat). The boat got to a point where they had "lost" the foils, so it came crashing down, dramatically reducing boatspeed. With the loss of boatspeed, the apparent wind swung aft very fast. It was impossible to ease the sail enough - look at the length of the traveller. That is what pushed the boat over. How can I be so sure? Because about 5 years ago, the A Class developed the traveller system from the traditional curved one that spans across the deck to a super short straight traveller. There is only one downside - exactly what happened to AM. I cannot count the number of capsizes that result from this very happening -the boat leaping out, slowing rapidly as it comes down and the wind swinging so far aft you cannot dump the sheet fast enough or the required amount.
  4. SimonN

    A-Class foiling sailors

    But if you look at the position of all the forces when a Moth is sailing, they are very similar to a Cat. Upwind, the Moth is heeled to windward by a considerable amount. Lateral resistance is produced by the (no longer) horizontal foil, which is well to leeward of the CoE of the rig
  5. SimonN

    A-Class foiling sailors

    I think that there are a number of things you are missing. For instance, the vertical parts of the rudders contribute to lateral resistance. As you move the rig and main foils further forward, the position of lateral resistance doesn't move forward by as much as you move those items, as the rudders stay where they are. That loads the rudders differently which can be positive but it can also be a big negative. Then you need to consider the distribution of lift between the main foils and the rudder winglets. The rudder winglets provide some lift, but they also act as stabilisers. The further away you place the main foils from the rudders, the harder the rudder winglets have to work, which increases drag. Forgetting everything else for a moment, if you stick the main foils up near the bow, the rudders need to support far more of the overall down force of the boat. Add the downforce loads from the rig (pulling in the sail pushes the bow down, easing allows the bow to come up), and you begin to see this as a 3d balancing problem. What I believe you need to do is to line up the centre of lift of all your foils (fore and aft) in relation to the centre of lateral resistance. Of course, that varies depending on conditions, point of sailing, where you stand in the boat etc., and some of those are controllable variables. What I do know is that those who have tried moving the rig and main foils a reasonable way forward have not been quick and I think we are pretty close to optimum. Interestingly, Moths have had a similar debate and some have tried pushing the rig and foils forward, but as with the A, it isn't fast. The final thing to consider is that there is also a compromise between speed and safety. I think that moving the rig and foils a long way forward might make the boat less twitchy, but that is at the expense of speed. I think this is why we see the foils on big tris so far forward - it's safe(r). You should be aware that the latest A's and Moths are designed by some of the top designers, many of who are leading development in the AC. The guys who design the Exploder A use their work on the A to help validate their VPP and they spend a ridiculous amount of time working on this stuff. Couple that with some of the best sailors doing testing and feedback, you might be surprised at what has been thought of an tested, if in some cases only in the computer (we are up to over 50 iterations of main foils, although many have stayed in the computer). Beam and foil positions are a constant source of debate, and changes have been made to optimise them. I can assure you that the position of the main beam (sailplan) , foils and rudders are considered as a whole and positioned to work together as a package.
  6. SimonN

    Prada Cup

    Sorry, but have to completely disagree. First, I am not looking at it from old monohull viewpoints, as I haven't sailed that type of boat for years. I sail foiling boats where we are doing 22-23 knots upwind (42 knots apparent windspeed) and 28-30 knots downwind. Yes, you are right that it is all about pressure, but if you are slower and go the same way, you cannot catch up. If you are behind, on the same side and get more pressure, it will not get you past a faster boat ahead and on the same side, because as you close on them the windspeed will equalise and then they are faster. Your only hope is to get a better shift or more pressure on the other side of the course. Separation is your only hope.
  7. SimonN

    Prada Cup

    Because extra manoeuvres are are a sure fire way of going faster Extra manoeuvres put you further behind and you wanted them to do them so they could get to the right side and follow Ineos. AM were slower. Going the same way as Ineos would have given them no chance. Your reading comprehension isn't great, is it. What part of "early days", "based on today" and "things could change with conditions" do you not understand? No big call or counting chickens, but based solely on today, it was clearly not a 3 horse race.
  8. SimonN

    Prada Cup

    I have so enjoyed reading how so many on here wrote Ben and the team off. Too early to really bake lots of humble pie, but most of you need to be eating some. What I cannot believe are some of the other comments being made FFS! AM looked really poor, which cannot be good for their sponsors. Why would any team sandbag to help another team's sponsors. Congrats on one of the more stupid posts. No they were not. What options do you have if you are behind and slower? Stay the same side of the course? That would never work. Their only option was to sail on the other side of the course and hope for something unexpected in terms of pressure and/or shifts. Yes, early days, but based on what we have seen today, we do not have 3 even teams. One seems significantly better than the other 2. Things could change with conditions, but based on this, it is a one horse race. For me, I hope it stays like that but for the event, I suspect others will want to see AM and LR get their acts together.
  9. SimonN

    High speed foiling mainsail control

    Let's try to put the double skin sail development into perspective. Consider the A as an example. In the case of the Heru sail and the Advance Wing Systems rigs that were done for A's, what was seen was the first iteration. When we develop a new sail (as we did for the A earlier this year), we probably built 5 or 6 test sails before getting it spot on. And that was developing an existing, fast sail. Overall, the current A rig is the result of years of development during which we have optimised the stiffness of masts (huge differences in the last 12-15 years) and refined sails every year. The A rig is already one of the most efficient rigs out there and these new rigs are trying to compete against that level of development. Looking at the Advanced Wing Systems rig, that needs mast and sail development. To do that properly, you would need to have a budget of between $150k and $200k (I discussed these figures with the person who had their A Class rig). You need to sell a lot of rigs to get that back, which means it is simply not worth it. Maybe if you are an AC team you can afford to develop this sort of rig (or have no option but to do so), but for everybody else, it's tough to make it happen.
  10. SimonN

    High speed foiling mainsail control

    Well, you would be incorrect! The correct way to measure is as normal, except where you need cross widths, when you measure from one leech to the other, going around the mast and taking that total measurement and dividing by 2. There is no problem using this type of rig on an A and it would be class legal. Again, I think you are mistaken. There is over a 1kg weight difference between masts currently being used, and my new sail is about 1.2kgs lighter than my old one, which, when new, was very, very fast. Some use synthetic rigging to reduce weight meaning there can be up to 3kgs difference between some rigs of the same height while those using shorter rigs can show bigger differences. Yet, for all of that, we hav ebeen unable to prove any speed benefit from significant weight reduction in the rig. One of the interesting developments with foiling is that it seems that weight, in every respect, is not as important as it used to be. Most boats are about 6-7kgs over minimum, rigs vary considerably and the weight range of sailors that can be competitive seems to be bigger than ever.
  11. SimonN

    High speed foiling mainsail control

    Let’s be very clear. The iFly is nowhere near close to an A Cat as was seen when the idiot responsible for them turned up at our Worlds in Weymouth. Besides getting into serious trouble with the harbourmaster for breaking the rules of the harbour and really posting the sailing centre off while needing to be rescued when there was no rescue service being offered, we saw just how slow the iFly really was against both foiling and non foiling A’s. He spent the week trying to find ways of getting faster, such as fitting an assymetric kite which didn’t work, and telling everybody how much easier and safer the iFly was compared with an A, yet he was the one who I had to get help for after he lost control, pitchpoled and broke his mast. Overall, he was rude, blocked our slipway while we were trying to launch to race and made a complete fool of himself. The iFly might be an OK boat (I prefer the S9) but all that was proven in Weymouth is that it is nothing like an A and that the owner of the company selling them is a rude, inconsiderate and delusional idiot.
  12. SimonN

    High speed foiling mainsail control

    That's not the WA rig. I haven't git any photos of it. What I do know is that in a very narrow range of wind angle and pressure, it was very fast, but for the most part, it wasn't adjustable enough to be quick through the wind range and across all sailing angles. It was always a tough call, because the A Class rig is probably the most efficient rig outside of a hard wing, because of the amount of development that has been done over such a long period of time.. I am not saying that the soft wing cannot be better, but the amount of development needed is financially too great to make it worthwhile.
  13. SimonN

    High speed foiling mainsail control

    There's guys in WA who make the gear. Done a couple of keelboats and a rig for an A Class.
  14. Your true colours are now coming out. What you have shown us is nothing short of racism. Fact - some of the best built, technically advanced boats in the world are built in China. If you are so prejudiced that you ignore that, you are a real dickhead. You have the right to decide where you buy your products from and I admire your desire to support products from your own country, but to simply trash the quality of a boat builder and their products without having seen them, just because of where they are made, is totally fucked up thinking.
  15. SimonN

    Fulcrum Speedworks Rocket

    The problem with people like you is that it's so much easier to write than to do. Dave (and Steve) have the courage of their convictions and more than a little bit of experience and they are prepared to back that with their own cash. You are happy to hide behind a made up name on a forum, with zero skin in the game and offer "advice" based on little more than having sailed and owned sailboats. It appears you are so tone deaf that you don't realise that your unsolicited "advise" is badly phrased and very arrogant. I doubt Dave and Steve mind people giving feedback, but you think you are above that and believe you are capable of advising them. Even if you did have some valid points, I would keep well away from somebody with such a poor attitude. Good luck, Dave (and Steve). You seem to have done pretty well out of following your own beliefs of what there is a market for and I am sure you will be rewarded for yet again having the courage of your convictions. Only bad news I can foresee is that from everything I know about boat building, another successful product will mean even less spare time, less sailing and no holidays. I hope you get what you deserve!!