• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  

RobG

Members
  • Content count

    1,247
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

44 Kiss-ass

About RobG

  • Rank
    Anarchist

Recent Profile Visitors

6,191 profile views
  1. Something like this (video):
  2. The video doesn't show that: ventilation starts at the surface and moves down, it doesn't start at the vortex of the (submerged) tip. A tip breaching the surface (or going very close) may induce ventilation, and vortexes may have an influence on that but that isn't what the video shows. Moth main foil tips occasionally pierce the surface due to windward heel, it doesn't seem to induce ventilation (speeds around 15 kn I guess).
  3. Foilers: brushing off seaweeds?

    What type of foils?
  4. But it's extremely unlikely they'll race at such speeds. While in the docking position, if the foil produces any lift at all, there will be a significant vector to leeward unless the foils can be trimmed for zero lift and minimum drag simultaneously. However it doesn't seem sensible to design for that scenario given the likely tradeoff in other areas and very low chance it will occur in racing. Where's the fallacy? 9kns TWS might have variations of perhaps ±3kn. I think the point is that if they can get foiling in a puff of say 11 or 12kn, they may be able to sustain it.
  5. AC36 CLASS RULE

    Paraphrasing should be shorter… ;-) I guess you could use nunchucks/nunchaku or bull whips too, but what control are they going to operate?
  6. AC36 CLASS RULE

    Fixed it for you. Unless you know of rowing machines that can be described as "grinding pedestals or winches that are operated by turning handles in a rotary motion with the hands."
  7. AC36 CLASS RULE

    The rule requires symmetry, so winglets on both tips should comply. If they're used at all I think they'll be very small. I can't see a "rigid coupling between leeway and heeling" when the foils can be canted independently of heel, adjusting the vertical/horizontal lift vectors as desired. A more general question: if 3 dimensional X,Y,Z axises are applied to the AC75, which directions do they align with? Is X fore/aft, Y port/starboard and Z vertical?
  8. Be careful what you wish for. A focus on Olympic medals can mean that everything is seen through the lens of Olympic classes. So if you want sponsored coaching and support, you must sail an Olympic class. That usually means sailing where those classes are sailed, so offshore for USA and AUS with little trickle down to local sailing. I've sailed in a fleet with many Olympic sailors (with me at the very tail end of the fleet), but not in an Olympic class.
  9. AC36 CLASS RULE

    There you go, dragging this thing kicking and screaming back on topic… The target for the AC75s must be continuous foiling, anything less will be a large backward step. Deathly silence on progress though…
  10. Aus will only send people to the Olympics if they're a medal chance. For sailing, that means you must be a top 10 world ranking, it's very strictly applied. Govt. funding is crap, enough to attend one overseas regatta per year. Anyone serious about selection must spend a lot of the year overseas competing, so needs a lot of financial backing ($200k to $300k at least). No wonder swimming hopefuls are a lot easier to recruit.
  11. trickle down

    Further to Basiliscus' post, this article claims water ski hydrofoils were first patented in 1956, but Google patents shows 1963.
  12. Presumably the class voted for it, maybe Phil can fill in the detail regarding competing offers?
  13. Chewie is in as representing IRL? Does the "Q" in "RQYS" no longer stand for Queensland?
  14. About 38% more ($1110 vs $1530 ex GST), which includes the lever vang kit so not really a big difference. In the overall cost of a boat, likely not significant. The issue of multiple sets of gear is not simple. Restricting boats to one set of foils per regatta may reduce the amount of good second hand gear coming onto the market. It might also reduce the size of the market and hence competition, pushing up prices. It may also affect innovation as the top competitors will tend to go for safe choices (well known, well established manufacturers), making it harder for new players and innovative concepts to get their gear sailed by one of the top guys. No matter how good your gear, if you can't sail it well enough to impress, it's not going to be adopted. Everyone wants the stuff on the winning boats, which (in a fleet full of Olympic, World and AC champions) is what the top guys are using. It's a similar problem with longevity, I don't think anyone considers it when buying. Current boats are all about the same, so building a longer lasting boat isn't a selling point if it's a fraction heavier or slower than it could be.
  15. I guess the UI will be like a reversing sensor: a string of lights and beeper. The closer you get, the more lights and faster the beep until a solid beep means "do your penalty". No need for umpires, if computers can run simulations as accurately as has been claimed, they should be able to make rule decisions with far greater precision than humans. They should also be able to give evasive action advice to ensure no contact, so the infringed boat doesn't have to push it to make the breach obvious.