• 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.  

NED 27

Members
  • Content count

    67
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About NED 27

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 04/22/1965

Profile Information

  • Location
    Netherlands
  • Interests
    High performance sailing. Foiling. A-class catamarans.
  1. A Class Cat : new rig from Mischa

    If the non rule 8 boards are a failure then that is the best proof we do not need rule 8. The lower COE only works on foiling boats. These boats do not need a marginal wilthing option for which you need max power at the hounds. For the topdogs it is either full floating or foiling. This rig is there to stay. If the boards may have extra span the rigs do not have to be so full. Mischa's rig has more dept then Glenn's. Glenn, Stevie and Mischa can already foil upwind over 15 kts of breeze but loose too much height to get it up the foils. Slightly longer foils will make it easier ad will improve foiling for all in marginal conditions. Mischa and Glenn can get the boat earlier on the foils due to a better technique, others will he helped with slightly more lift. Removing rule 8 does not open a can of worms. It just brings back the rule to the original boxrule and will give room for further incremental change. Older boats can easiliy adopt the new sails and the boards with more span. The status quo is not changing that hard. Mischa is using the same boards as last year. What is new is just his sail and his rudderwinglets.
  2. A Class Cat : new rig from Mischa

    The Melvin and Goodall rig (I did one with PJ too) in the late 80ties as well) were used on non foiling boats. Mischa sails his traveller much higher than a boat going flat or doing the wildthing and keeps his foot quite close to the centerline. If you are doing the wildthing on traditional boats you could not really speed up the boat and to go for more depth. The curved boards and trapezing downwind improved that. We already lost the utra wide 1,0 meter heads and we are going now to the Mischa rig for all foiling boats. Mischa was just as quick upwind in the light as some lighter people with conventional rigs. When he cannot foil he is slower downwind but he only needs one gust to get it up and then he can keep it foiling in as low as 5-6 kts. Mscha's brainwave was that he decided to use max luff length this time and not shorten the mast. That provided a more allround solution. It will be hard to decide for Glenn and Stevie if they should switch to this kind of rig for the Worlds. With so many fast non foilers they might be beaten in the really light stuff and with only discard this will be big risk. If Mischa wins 7 races and gets 2 30's and Glenn or Stevie sails constant in the top 3, they will beat Mischa. Mischa has only one option: Go for his latest rig and pray for a decent see breeze all races. If we get some 15 kt plus races we might even see some competitive upwind foiling by him.
  3. A Class Cat : new rig from Mischa

    The mast is a Fiberfoam produced DNA mast. For prices yo have to ask MIscha, Fiberfoam or Holland Composites.
  4. A Class Cat : new rig from Mischa

    It was not breezy at all. The first day 2 bft and the second day a decent 3 bft. Last day was cancelled.
  5. A Class Cat : new rig from Mischa

    Mischa tested in Takapuna a decksweeper too with a shorter mast. That one was too vulnerable in lighter winds. Decksweepers have been used earlier in the A-class, but were never fast. It was always faster to have more cloth higher especially in marginal wildthing. With the foiling boats we do not have a marginal wildthing, just floating or full foiling. The breakthrough of Mischa is that he kept max luff length and moved the draft in the sail forward (= more depth downwnd) The Swiss found a long time ago that upwind a smaller square head is actually faster. With the big square heads foiling in gusty conditions is tricky. If you open the sheet too much the boat jumps out of the water and the weather hull will come down. The Mischa solution has much better roll stability and it is the way to go if more and more people are foiling. If most people are foiling all rigs will be optimized for medium winds and you will not be hurt in floating mode. The surprise was that in floating mode it was not too bad either.
  6. A Class Rule 8 needs to stay.

    Simon, The evidence thing is really really a BS argument. The boats with the uptip foils of Dario go really well. These boats foil upwind and can do foiling gybes with an expert sailor. (both boards down) (Why is Dario not allowed to race in an A-class event, just to see what is possible?) The latest daggerboard designs within rule 8 have bigger tips, but the effective projected area is still small. A foiling kite has a main foil of 600 cm2, a DNA daggerboard is 400 cm2 (800 total). To be able to foil upwind we need a lift off speed of 12 kts or less (a kite foils at 12 kts too) for that we need 500 cm2 (projected horizontal area) Z boards. (which is just 50 cm by 10 cm). A better aspect ratio leads to a much lower induced drag. You see that the latest Exploder daggerboard can almost make the boat fly upwind. Just a bit longer foil (more span) will do that. If we make bigger foils within rule 8 you get Flying Carpet like boards which are very very wide, even these work but do limit end speed and the windward board has to be raised in non flying conditions. If you want to preserve the put in from the top, you can also propose that we just allow extra span. Uptip boards are more efficient than Z boards will ever be though (once you are foiling) but with the extra span Z boards you do not throw all potential performance away. For foiling upwind we do not need Veal heal, just a canted board. If you have an active L board and you can cant that with the use of a slider,you are there. Some Moths already use canting masts to set the mast straight if they heel the boat to cant the active board, therefore rig cant isn't essential and actually reduces performance. Active boards can be simple too, see the latest Whisper solution. Active flaps can be used on L boards too. Current A-class foilers suck, they are fun as it is a step in the right direction but still as foilers these boats suck. We better go back to floating boats (not for me) or allow full development. The whole foiling technology is not mature yet, it needs more development and that's why we have and need development classes. Foiling A-cats are an alternative for foiling Moths as they will be more versatile. Foiling kites are even faster and cheaper but less accessible especially for the gerifoilers. If we keep rule 8 we will get stuck with current solutions which are at best mediocre. A Moth sails circles around a foiling A-cat now. With some proper development we will not see Moth style A's but proper foiling A's which will outperform Moths around the course. The windage of A-cats is not as bad as Phil S suggest. The wings of a Moth incure quite some drag too and a Moth is effectively 2,3 m wide too. The arguments used by the 'keep rule 8' defenders are quite similar as used by the confederates to maintain slavery (our economy will fall apart). Just plain BS and history will prove them wrong too. Give innovation and progress a chance. Remember that after the Europeans in La Baule in 2009 where Bob Baier did so well with the curved boards NIkita many people wanted to ban curved boards. ( too complicated, too expensive to build). See where we are now, after the curved board came the winglets, then the J boards and now the Z boards. The boats have become faster, more fun and can be sailed in more breeze. Freezing development by maintaining rule 8 is a really bad idea, it can wreck the class completely. If you want to maintain a certain status quo you better sail an OD class.
  7. A Class Rule 8 needs to stay.

    The fact is that some people with older boats seem to prefer the uptip foils over the Z and J foils. See the recent conversion of some older BIM's. I agree that you still have to move the daggerboard cases and add sliders. s is true If uptip foils are better we should be able to adopt these. I am not sure as I have not sailed these myself. The class is at risk if boats as the Whisper and the new Waszp become a success. I can better spend my money on a foiling kite or foiling windsurfer than on a limped half foiler. I will rest my case heer. Clueless why creating better foiling boats can be so upsetting to some. We will wait what will happen at the AGM.
  8. A Class Rule 8 needs to stay.

    I hope we can be pragmatic as a class and postpone rule 8 directly after the Worlds. Then we can see what happens and which corrective measurers have to be taken. If we can trust the process we are better off. Just trust both the development class and the class management process to take any necessary action. Foiling will be easier and not more complicated with extra span, as it takes less effort to get it up the foils, which makes sustainable flight while just sitting on the side possible and we can use other more foregiving sections. Without the extra span we have to compromise performance. With just a few improvements the A-class can be faster around the track then the Moth while being more versatile. This can be done with a four foil solution with retractable foils. If we fantasize we better fantasize about good stuff. It will be a very accessible foiler for new foilers while being challenging enough for the experts. Now the floaters have split we better focus on how we can get the best foiling A-class. Best as in high performance, good handling both on and off the water, affordable and durable.
  9. A Class Rule 8 needs to stay.

    Hi Lars, The Flying carpet solution works but is not ideal within rule 8. The aspect ratio of the foils is not too good and the wide diagonal compromises performance in many circumstances. I expect to see some foiling gybes and some upwind foiling in Punta Ala, the latest Exploder set-up is pretty close. I could live with a new rule which prohibits put in from the bottom foils but allows more span. Unfortunately that is not the option we have in the AGM.
  10. A Class Rule 8 needs to stay.

    Hi Simon, You keep asking for evidence, while the evidence is that the rule unnessarily restricts us. If non rule compliant foils have problems they will either not be competitive or we should deal with the issues as class. The whole idea of a development class is that you can try new things. No evidence needed. If we add some span to the Z-board, I cannot see how that complicates launching or would increase costs. Rule 8 limits are too severe and the intention of this rule failed. I agree with you that put in from the bottom foils are not ideal, but I do not wish to rob people of this option as it is a possibility to retrofit older boats. Your fear for the launching problems isn't evidence based either,as it is still to be seen if put in from the bottom foils are competitive. So far all put in from the bottom foils have been foils which needed to be raised at windward. This may not be the best and most all round solution around the racecourse. If such foils become the best performing foils we can have a discussion as a class and see if the extra performance outweighs the extra hassle. This is all hypothetical as I have not seen such foils win a race or championship. Restricting the extra span may cost the class too much. It is an easy and cheap solution which has its proven merits. We cannot freeze current developments as people will flee to other classes when the upwind foiling and foiling gybe is realized there. Rule 8 is not the way to handle might be scenario's. Are you willing to take the risk to outdate the A-class as a class? Keeping what works well makes sense and is what any sensible innovator does. The history of the class show that we have gotten better boats over time, let's continue that process.
  11. A Class Rule 8 needs to stay.

    Good point of Rawhide. Rule 8 was a political compromise to making foiling harder. Launching problems should be dealt with when they occur not on beforehand. The rising cost issue is always used as argument against development classes. So far the boats have not become much more expensive, but I would not have liked to buy 4 sets of Exploder daggerboards in one year. The cost argument stinks. It could have been used to ban carbon masts or nomex cored hulls too. Attaching to the present out of fear for the future is used as defense for so many things. If Simon is right that we will never see foiling gybes or upwindfoiling than he still can let go of rule 8 as little will change. Foiling gybes are actually possible on a flying Phantom. The fact that upwind foiling is not too competive on beach cats does not mean that it will not happen. Both the FP and the NACRA FCS are just first generation OD foilers. Uptipfoils foils are not the best solution for upwind foiling as an increase leeway angle is used to control heave. The foiling beach cats do report significantly higher speeds though, but still lacking a good angle. If cost and launching become real issues the class should deal with it but it cannot be done on a 'might happen' idea. Give the innovators a chance to create even better boats. All developments have led to extra costs as we had to change our aluminium masts and our straight boards and glass polyester hulls. The cost of ownership for a competitive A has declined over the years. The more durable boats have high resale values and older boats which have been retrofitted are sold for decent prices even when not fully competitive. Simon has found the fun of foiling because as a class we allowed this to happen. Maybe he is so happy that he is afraid that he might loose his current state of foiling bliss.
  12. A Class Rule 8 needs to stay.

    The arguments of Simon are a bit odd. Why demanding evidence? The evidence is that rule 8 is dysfunctional as we do not see foiling gybes. It is not changing the rules, it is restoring the rules. If put in from the bottom foils suck we should ban these after they are faster. Do Simon and others realized what the costs are if rule 8 stays in place? Any thoughts about benefits? If Simon is so afraid he better goes sailing a floating A. His a arguments about costs lack any substance. Having boards with some more span will increase forces but not so dramatically that we cannot build boards with existing technology. Dario has shown foiling gybes, though these are not an illusion. Heveven showed upwnd foiling. Some development needs to be done but it for grasps. I am clueless why people want to keep such a dysfunctional rule and cannot see the benefits. We can have the benefits and manage the downside. I would hate to see that we keep half foiling boats. It will kill the class as others options are emerging. It is also peculiar to ask evidence for future developments in a development class. The evidence is produced on the race course and before you can produce that evidence we first have to get rid of rule 8. Why would a buyer invest in an illegal solution? The essence of a development class is that new things can be tried. Many experiments fail and the ones which work ate absorbed by the other sailors. The evidence is that rule 8 could not prevent foiling boats and is therefore both obsolete and dysfunctional. Rule 8 could not prevent that Exploder produced 4 different Z foils and 3 types of J foils within a year. Without rule 8 it would have been much easier to see in which direction you can develop effectively. Current solutions have all kind of work around in it. I like what the floaters did with their own class association. That makes sense but do not yet to stop desired development with bollock arguments.
  13. A Class Rule 8 needs to stay.

    You are right, and I regret it too, but it is the price to pay in a development class where some are more interested in finding the little trick that will give them a speed advantage over their competitors, rather than improving their technique and tactics, that for me are the core of competitive sailing. Whatever development we have seen in the A-class, the best sailors did still win. Technique and tactics remained as decisive. Foiling is a technique which needs to be mastered. The great thing of a development class is that you can adopt your boat and set-up to your weight and sailing style. We see that the guys with the most hours on the water win the championships. If the launching with put in from the bottom is as hard as some people suggest we should get a rule especially for that but not before someone has won a championship with such boards. Freezing the boats as they are now is something which goes against the spirit of the class and its history. The great thing of the A is that we always could absorb new technology and actions were taken if things went to extreme (the weight limit, after de did see some super light boast). My first A-class in 1984 weighted 115 kgs, had 30 cm wide boards, an aluminium mast and a dacron sail. That boat is still used at a Dutch catclub. If we had not had rule 8, we would had a shorter development cycle with less cost for both the builders and the sailors.
  14. A Class Rule 8 needs to stay.

    The defenders will just buy a new pair of boards and forget that they were once defenders of the status quo. If rule 8 stays we will get a very small class as the people will flee to full flying options. (both Glenn and Landy already prefer the Moth over the A class) Rule 8 is dysfunctional and should be abolished just on that ground. Then we can discuss if we need new rules after something has happened that we do not want. Fear and plain old conservatism will bring us nowhere. The A-class has survived due to its status of development class, why restrict simple enhancements? Why vote against something with is inevitable in the end? It is not about disagreement but holding on to positions which are not worth to defend.
  15. A Class Rule 8 needs to stay.

    The arguments used to keep rule 8 are the same as used to keep the boats floating: Why chance a great boat? Why disturb what we have? How do we know what the future will bring? We have seen a split in the class and all people who are foiling now do so with big grins on their faces even if they lose a race to a floater. No one foiling wants to go back to floating again. Once you have been foiling, you are hooked for life. Rule 8 prevents extra span (the 1,5m between the tips rule) and we cannot add extra lift without making the boards very wide and very draggy. If I fly I want to do foiling gybes and upwind foiling too. All those things can be accomplished with some extra span. These new daggerboard can even fit in boats which comply with rule 8. Why sail a compromised foiler if with little more development we can have great foilers? Current foilers are already fantastic, but is it wrong to dream about even better boats? A 2014 DNA with Z boards does fly at 13,4 kts of boatspeed (hard GPS data). For a foiling gybe you must be able to set the traveller on the inside of the hull and still be able to keep flying (estimated needed lift-off speed is 11 kts) for upwind foiling we have to have a lift-off speed under 12 kts of boatspeed. To have a lift off speed of 12 kts we need 25% more lift and to fly at 11 kts 50%. The new DNA rudders add about 10% lift though the board needs to generate 15% more lift to be able to fly upwind and 35% downwind. Effective span is now 33,5cm. With 10 cm span extra span on each side and by having vertical symmetrical sections which go sllghtly outside first we can increase effective span to 50 cm. That will create 50% more lift. Voila foiling gybes and upwind foiling. (this looks like the latest Exploder Z with a longer diagonal) If we cannot do that we will not see foiling gybes and upwind foiling or we will compromise end speed significantly by using wide and draggy daggerboards. This is not just theoretically. Dario built both bigger Z boards and even active Z-boards and he could do foiling gybes. That boards were oversized even to his opinion but showed what is possible. We should not fear innovation. Our current boats are evidence for that. If future developments make boats too costly or too complex we can add rules to correct that. A good guideline would be; do not forbid anything which has not been proven competitive AND harmful to the class. We have not banned rigid wings. We do not want those as they will make the boat hard to launch and very expensive, but we need not to ban these as no one has ever won a championship with a rigid wing. Some extra span is an easy and cheap solution, why prevent that?