• 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.  

P Flados

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About P Flados

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Location
    North Carolina
  1. The Next Boat-----2020

    Most any flap has some disturbance at the hinge line. The standard moth approach minimizes the disturbance at the top surface which is probably where it matter the most. In the quoted text, I was talking about the plan view geometry with a crecent flap behing a straight hinge. The hinge itself would still be any one of the standard choices with applicable pros and cons. Again, the focus of the overall post was mostly that flaps choices are probably being constrained very much by the mechanics of actuating the flap. I belive that if a the mechanics of a torque cable type drive were worked out and made more available, we would see some more creative approaches for overal foil shapes.
  2. The Next Boat-----2020

    Flaps do not really require "straight sections". Straight hinges do make them a lot easier though. A flapped foil can have plenty of curvature from vertical to a more or less horizontal portion that is straight enough for a crescent shaped flap that would extend to the rear of the fixed portion. The geometry would be fine for the hydrodynamics, but the flap actuation would not be a simple proposition.
  3. The Next Boat-----2020

    Rapid adjustment capability from the main lifting foil(s) is not needed at all if it is located more center to rear with a "controlled foil" (probably flap like a moth or AOA adjustable like Trifoiler, however it could even be a simple Vee) way out front. This concept was used for: On 27 October 1991, Mark Drela pedalled the human-powered hydrofoil, Decavitator, to a world-record speed of 18.5 knots (9.53 meters/second) over a 100 meter race course The web info on Decavitor is pretty detailed and interesting. And by the way, Drela seems to be pretty well versed in all things related to foils (both air and hydo).
  4. The over the top fans of the Emerites team are getting pretty sickening in their "bad sport winners" attitude. Point 1: Yes ETNZ was the clear winner that combined the best boat design with a good crew. Point 2: Many AC winners have won with similar dominance. It is actually the standard result when the selected boat is a "much less than mature" boat. Point 3: When an "innovative design" has provided the dominance, it is usually because either the team "discovered something special" or because "everything came together" for one team. Point 4: What I have seen puts ETNZ into the "everything came together" catgegory. A really big input to this was most likely the "gift" from LR. This probably set them down the path that resulted in better foil control. It also made them a "better investment" for their other sponsers. I will strongly argue that if ETNZ had used the same basic method for foil control as the other teams, they would not have been "dominant". They may have still won based on otherwise top notch results of the desing team and the skills of the great crew they assembled, but not nearly as easily as they did. Point 5: Given that their is a good likelihood that a big part of there dominance was the "gift" from a pissed off deep pocket B, ETNZ fan boys really ought to stop acting like ETNZ walked on water and that the rest of the teams were cluless idiots that should be called "a bunch of loosers". Although I have never really pulled for AR, their boat was pretty impressive given how well it performed without the "secret weapon" of the X box foil controls. Point 6: Etnz was not flawless and it could have easily lost. They did make at least one big mistake taht could have been a dissaster for their cahllenge. If the ETNZ pitchpole had resulted in more significant damage, I am betting that the final would have been a much clser event, but we would all be discussing the next AC as an opportunity for all of the teams to take the ETNZ "secrets" an apply them to beating the "New Defender".
  5. What a farce of a statement. 1. Rules is Rules and everyone had the same chance 2. The Emerates team could have been one up had they won their last face to face meeting.
  6. A Class Rule 8 needs to stay.

    Disclaimer: I only wish I had an A Class boat From my viewpoint: Insert from above has real value to a large number of sailors. Insert from below may have real value to a select few (mostly the quick upgrade crowd). Non compliant boats with this aspect should be encouraged as "experiments" and/or reduced cost/time routes to updating old boats. Is it really hard to envision any harm from promoting "insert from below" boats where:It is helpful in trying out something new that might be easier It is helpful in trying out something new that might be faster It is helpful in letting someone quickly have the lowest cost path to more fun and/or be competitive in non important racing (not nationals or worlds) Those doing it know that it is only a shortcut that would eventually need fixing beforeGoing into production Going for any race title that matters Other aspects of rule 8 are more arbitrary at this point. With fast foiling turning up all kinds of new shapes, letting people play games with different shapes would seem to be more in the spirit of a development class. On the other hand if the fastest shape turns out to be non rule 8 compliant and much more expensive (require more high tech build), there would be reason to hesitate. My take on this is that it would be best to promote experimentation as a first step. If a shape looks promising, the rules would only be opened up if the majority felt it was worth the extra cost (I would tend to vote against extra cost - this could force developers to try to figure out how to get the benefit without the extra bucks). Actually the class could consider replacing the dimensional aspects of Rule 8 with new words that simply disallow the higher cost foil build methods. The above would allow "insert from below" where it does not affect production boats and it would allow any shape that does not add a lot of cost. Even if you do not change any rules any time soon, getting a little more consensus on a long term objective would influence those making new boats. For new boats, the biggest push from the sailors to the makers at the point should probably be a very loud "we want dagger cases that allow easy foil changes with no significant case modification regardless of new developments".
  7. Corsair Pulse 600

    Careful, just how many "trimaran owners " (in the context of the Pulse) are really fighting. The Pulse had issues with the plan for folding and we have not seen how this has been resolved. Until a video or first hand testimonial are provided, it would seem fair to poke a little at this feature. Other postings (of "trimaran owners") seem more of "oh please - please show me a video" based on hoping that the boat will be a good performing option worth considering.
  8. Foils

    Destruction derby version foils with knife sharp leading edges would probably warrant a different mindset for the crew - If you capsize you need to try to fall on top of the sails to avoid floating out in open water with other boats slicing by.
  9. 18' Whisper Production Foiling Cat

    Phil provides an excellent discussion above. Most main foils need to provide a near fixed amount of lift over the widest possible range of speeds, Flaps greatly improve performance in this area. This is actually one of the few good cross-overs from airplane wing technology. All standard large aircraft use flaps for lift. The "best" performing wings are quite complex. They go from a single element low camber wing at cruise to an increased cord, 3 element and very high camber wing to get the same lift at drastically reduced speeds. For a foiler without wands (or other active control equivalent), flaps will allow lower take offs combined with less drag at higher speeds. The flap drive is the biggest area that is not fully figured out yet (I envision a "speedometer" cable). From the top of the foil to the crew, the manual flap controls for this application should be easy enough with multiple acceptable choices available. I do expect experiments with a manual flap on a L foil or an Uptip foil for the function described above. The payoff is just too big to ignore.
  10. Bucket List

    ^ No jab at BL at all. A well sorted BL should be very impressive. The focus of that sentence was more of a brag on the Russell side. ^^ There are lots of potential choices for foil arrangement. I really do not think that any "just two foils" solution would work well for proa full foiling. Three total with 2 in the water sounds faster. Four total foils with three in the water would probably be the least effort way to assure reasonable function on the first try. The problem (for now) is cost. Just consider the amount of expensive technology (design, prototype testing & construction) that has been required for any of the better foiling cats we have seen. Choosing a foiling concept that could transfer from a tri to a proa and then starting with the tri is probably not a bad choice. However, this just seems like a long path to get to the desired destination.
  11. Bucket List

    Russell, Thanks for believable facts on the recent performance. Water ballast plus crew RM has plenty of speed potential. I do not think any boat similar to yours has been seriously designed and optimized for distance racing. I would consider more beam to get more RM from a single exposed crew + water ballast. This combined with serious reefing provisions could limit structural loads. It would need crew discipline (to understand the limits on how much total RM generating weight is allowed). There is no reason at all that your approach should not be hard to beat going up against comparable cats & tris. Rob, Thanks for not poking too hard. Until we start seeing good performing Harrys out there in comparable settings, I really like having Jzerro or another proa show up "traditional boats". All such examples are good press for all proa fans. Everyone else, Less bickering & more civil discussion is also good for all proa fans. Most know what I will call the "key talking points" for both sides. The less these are repeated and/or emphasized, the less opportunity for backlash. Why cant we just brag on innovation and/or good on the water performance without jabs. I am a real proa fan. I made one attempt, and then gave up on the proa and did a small tri test platform build. I need to decide on my next "small test platform" sailboat. As I would like to figure out a cheap Joe average buildable single handed foiling boat, I am leaning toward a sliding beam tri, However, I also keep circling back given that I know a proa would be better if I could make it work.
  12. Bucket List

    Either Proa layout can perform well if properly designed and setup for the conditions. The Jzerro design allows for water ballast to provide lots of RM. However, when using water ballast, it does add weight to the overall package. I am not sure how much water ballast TP&W could handle in rough water without causing problems. This is a function of overall main hull length & displacement vs. actual boat weight. The Harry concept does have potential to get the same or better RM without water weight. For either concept, other details (rig, structural adequacy, rudders/daggers/foils probably) are more likely to hold back ultimate performance more than the basic layout. There are examples of performance sailing where a large portion of the "ongoing active development" gets shared on the web. Performance Proa development does not seem to have as much detailed real info on the web. I would love to see more documentation (videos, GPS tracks, side by side cat vs. proa descriptions, polars, etc) of people getting the most they can out of their Proas. Without good on the water evidence, this type of boat will probably not be considered worth the effort by most people. I consider this a shame as there is plenty of potential worth development.
  13. Gunboat G4 Foiler

    Like I said
  14. GC32 super cat

    Standard product sailboats are starting to approach the speeds where the outright record chasers hit the "cavitation barrier/wall". The GC32 seems to be leading the charge. From the same source as the previous post: http://www.alinghi.com/news/alinghi-break-gc32-speed-record Alinghi have broken the GC32 speed record! Last week, in a training session on Lake Geneva, the team clocked 39.21 knots, well over a whole knot faster than the previous record that was set on Lake Garda in July 2014. Perhaps even more impressive, the top speed is a full five knots faster than the team’s previous personal best of 34.2 knots, set only earlier this year. With such a rapid trajectory, the elusive 40 knot barrier is in sight. Onwards and, indeed, upwards!
  15. Gunboat G4 Foiler

    Video, what video