Barnyb

Team UK

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

My guess is pretty close, I would say 10-12 kts of wind with 20-25 kts of speed. Just by the thumb.

Very interesting, the windward foil does not seem as high as already seen, so they may use the tip + negative flap in order to lift the boat when falling to windward. That would be the decisive solution to prevent a windward crash.

What do you think ?

As the windward foil in the position they were carrying it had the lifting surfaces (foil wings) essentially perpendicular to the sea surface, it can only produce drag and yaw when it digs in, no lift that I can see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, nav said:

As the windward foil in the position they were carrying it had the lifting surfaces (foil wings) essentially perpendicular to the sea surface, it can only produce drag and yaw when it digs in, no lift that I can see.

You are right, however with inversed V I wonder if they can angle it, and use some negative or positive flap, so that it produces lift when hitting the water.

Obviously we would need better picture and test to know if it works. If possible that would be a major achievement and greatly increase the boat stability as it would work like a dynamic trimaran.

If it works any mono could be be transformed as a foiler with trimaran stability, huge potential.

Remains to be demonstrated though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

You are right, however with inversed V I wonder if they can angle it, and use some negative or positive flap, so that it produces lift when hitting the water.

Obviously we would need better picture and test to know if it works. If possible that would be a major achievement and greatly increase the boat stability as it would work like a dynamic trimaran.

If it works any mono could be be transformed as a foiler with trimaran stability, huge potential.

Remains to be demonstrated though.

Why bother with a mono?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Sailbydate said:

Why bother with a mono?

In some instances boats that flip back up the right way by themselves are preferable.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Boybland said:

In some instances boats that flip back up the right way by themselves are preferable.

Ha. Damn right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, dg_sailingfan said:

I'm not defending INEOS's business practices, but prior to their involvement the press releases from Ainslie and Simmer sounded like they may not be able to run a competitive campaign. So the choice to the team may have been INEOS or nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In response, World Sailing chief executive Andy Hunt said although the governing body had not yet given official sanction to the America's Cup event, they expected to do so "in due course".

Hunt said while racing boat advertising must comply with World Sailing's advertising code and meet generally accepted moral and ethical standards, it "does not sanction or otherwise approve sponsorship of competitors or teams".

"World Sailing has laid out its own ambitious commitment to help create a better world through sport through Sustainability Agenda 2030 and we have no reason to believe that the 36th America's Cup will not comply with World Sailing policy."

 

He didn't add "Oh by the way, we are sponsored by Gazprom, compared to whom Ineos are angels."

But good for Vivienne Westwood et al for turning around the greenwash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Fireball said:

I'm not defending INEOS's business practices, but prior to their involvement the press releases from Ainslie and Simmer sounded like they may not be able to run a competitive campaign. 

Really? I recall no such press releases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/27/2018 at 12:38 PM, nav said:

Ah hmm........

'Cleanest' to dirtiest campaign - in one big cheque. :D

image.png.a00e5b241c058dd934294265db2a2abe.png

"Principles? Don't be silly - that was all spin"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my swiss town Lausanne, INEOS have nearly bought the soccer team and ice-hockey team, with some bad reactions, but the people forget very quickly this kind of troubles... I will not forget, and I hope that this totally insane company will not get the opportunity to have a clean image thanks sailing. I was doubtfull from day one on, and still hope some changes in this AC sponsoring deal...  https://twitter.com/BlackmanLenoir/status/989454208821841920

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People seem to forget or not realise that this is more than a sponsorship deal. Radcliffe owns the team. This deal will not be undone.

I also find the protesters mentioned above really naive to think that any sports governing body  or even event organiser could ban INEOS from sponsoring a team in the AC. This is not like cigarette advertising in F1, which stopped because countries banned cigarette advertising which meant F1 couldn't be shown or take place in those countries which was unacceptable to F1. In this case, INEOS isn't doing anything illegal and as a company are not banned from advertising in any country that i am aware of. I don't like what they do, but there are zero legal reasons for preventing INEOS from sponsoring a sailing team.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, A Class Sailor said:

... I don't like what they do...

Me either, but I still drive a gas powered vehicle, my outboard runs on gasoline, so does my chainsaw, lawnmower, snowblower, rototiller, ... the list goes on... plus I consume electricity generated from natural gas... fuck me.. I am supporting fracking! Only fracking good thing about it, one company at least supports sailing. Way better than F1 or other fas guzzling sports. Every evil has a bright spot I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, A Class Sailor said:

I also find the protesters mentioned above really naive to think that any sports governing body  or even event organiser could ban INEOS from sponsoring a team in the AC.

It's also naive to believe the protesters believe that is a likely outcome. What they are doing is pointing at greenwash,. By the way, here's a picture of a younger Vivienne Westwood. Do you like the t-shirt slogan?

1*8CAABfJRSAHHtekS9BQKBA.jpeg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

World $ailing will do precisely nothing - they need the $$$$ from AC.    Bob Fisher got it right and then the riposte from the W$ bean counters was classic accountancy obfuscation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GBH said:

Bob Fisher got it right 

Link please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the problem with INEOS?  They are a major chemical company and we need chemicals, solvents, plastics, etc.. to live in our current society.  Fracking is an environmental problem and should be better understood before it is being used, but that is not the major profit drivers of INEOS.  Most chemical companies are very keen on environmental issues and can be run ethically and their profits are not "dirty money".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, dogwatch said:

It's also naive to believe the protesters believe that is a likely outcome. What they are doing is pointing at greenwash,. By the way, here's a picture of a younger Vivienne Westwood. Do you like the t-shirt slogan?

 

 

What is it that Johnny Rotten (the Sex Pistols) said of Vivienne Westwood  (and her ex-partner, Malcolm McLaren)?

“A pair of shysters; they would sell anything to any trend that they could grab onto”.

It appears that she is not adverse to a bit of greenwash herself:

https://eluxemagazine.com/magazine/vivienne-westwood-is-not-eco-friendly/

FWIW, her manoevures to avoid paying UK tax make it hard for her to criticize Ratcliffe.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bottom line is that hydraulic frakking for onshore shale natural gas is one of the cleanest and safest forms of carbon energy in the world.

There have been no "Deepwater Horizon" disasters in the Marcellus, no Piper Alpha disasters in the Bakken. 

Nothing beats Solar, Geothermal, and Wind in terms of clean energy.....but while we continue to rely on carbon energy...shale gas continues to be the cleanest and safest source.  The greatest problem with Frakking is not the frakk' itself but the "produced water" which comes from the wells.  If folks wanted to sensibly focus their energy on worthwhile legislative initiatives, they should push for strict controls around the disposal of produced water.....of which the most environmentally friendly would be recycling into pre-frack water.

All the burbling about earthquakes and the like from the opponents to hydraulic frakking makes them sound as absurd as those who do not believe that carbon emissions and the human population explosion are creating climate change.  

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, GBH said:

World $ailing will do precisely nothing - they need the $$$$ from AC.    

If you are correct that their decision is influenced by the money they need, and if that wasn't an issue, what do you propose they could do? How could they ban a perfectly legal entity who undertakes legal activities from sponsoring a team? In the case of F1 and cigarette advertising, that was easy because cigarette advertising was banned in many F1's venues and key markets. AFAIK, INEOS isn't banned from advertising their brand anywhere.

I believe there are zero ground on which World Sailing could act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, IPLore said:

What is it that Johnny Rotten (the Sex Pistols) said of Vivienne Westwood  (and her ex-partner, Malcolm McLaren)?

“A pair of shysters; they would sell anything to any trend that they could grab onto”.

It appears that she is not adverse to a bit of greenwash herself:

https://eluxemagazine.com/magazine/vivienne-westwood-is-not-eco-friendly/

FWIW, her manoevures to avoid paying UK tax make it hard for her to criticize Ratcliffe.

Good post, she is well known for her ‘convenient’ protests. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, IPLore said:

The bottom line is that hydraulic frakking for onshore shale natural gas is one of the cleanest and safest forms of carbon energy in the world.

There have been no "Deepwater Horizon" disasters in the Marcellus, no Piper Alpha disasters in the Bakken. 

Nothing beats Solar, Geothermal, and Wind in terms of clean energy.....but while we continue to rely on carbon energy...shale gas continues to be the cleanest and safest source.  The greatest problem with Frakking is not the frakk' itself but the "produced water" which comes from the wells.  If folks wanted to sensibly focus their energy on worthwhile legislative initiatives, they should push for strict controls around the disposal of produced water.....of which the most environmentally friendly would be recycling into pre-frack water.

All the burbling about earthquakes and the like from the opponents to hydraulic frakking makes them sound as absurd as those who do not believe that carbon emissions and the human population explosion are creating climate change.  

 

Are these areas that are being frakked? I’m not familiar with the names/geography. 

The disposal water has only had a minor mention compared to the seismic and damage to underground supplies to aquifers etc. I’ll take a look and see if this has even been covered properly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, IPLore said:

The bottom line is that hydraulic frakking for onshore shale natural gas is one of the cleanest and safest forms of carbon energy in the world.

There have been no "Deepwater Horizon" disasters in the Marcellus, no Piper Alpha disasters in the Bakken. 

Nothing beats Solar, Geothermal, and Wind in terms of clean energy.....but while we continue to rely on carbon energy...shale gas continues to be the cleanest and safest source.  The greatest problem with Frakking is not the frakk' itself but the "produced water" which comes from the wells.  If folks wanted to sensibly focus their energy on worthwhile legislative initiatives, they should push for strict controls around the disposal of produced water.....of which the most environmentally friendly would be recycling into pre-frack water.

All the burbling about earthquakes and the like from the opponents to hydraulic frakking makes them sound as absurd as those who do not believe that carbon emissions and the human population explosion are creating climate change.  

 

I found this a fascinating listen...

https://www.thisamericanlife.org/440/game-changer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dg_sailingfan said:

INEOS should withdraw with Ben too from all America's Cup Activities who made a mess out of it with their Sponsorship.

Why? At least the guy has won something recently, unlike that "other" Team Great Britain skipper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mfluder said:

Why? At least the guy has won something recently, unlike that "other" Team Great Britain skipper

Don't forget it's just the standard clueless nonsense we've come to expect (and didn't miss) from A4e... Best to pop on Iggy like last time..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2018 at 8:40 AM, IPLore said:

The bottom line is that hydraulic frakking for onshore shale natural gas is one of the cleanest and safest forms of carbon energy in the world.

Except for the release of CHto the atmosphere.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This Ineos is poison Shite pisses me off! 

You think land rover one of the biggest 4x4 brands gave a shit about building clean energy vehicles?

emirates, airbus etc yup we run or build fucking huge planes burning tonnes of fossil fuel every hour and yet they are not held up as ‘bad’

Nescafé kiwi coffee sponsors  with all the stupid coffee pods that don’t break down contributing hugely to plastic contamination.

Not at all,  but as soon as a self made billionaire gets involved fuck me don’t all the bleeding hearts come out all upset.

the AC is not an environmentally sound premis, building single use race boats from carbon fibre and other chemically derived compounds and then flying them around the world for a tv audience  and a big corporate shin dig is not what you do when you are worried about environmental impact.

how have people lost sight of any of that? 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask any celebrity "environmentalist" who flies around the world in oversized private jets to make a stand for The Environment.

It is those who speak most loud for the cause, that have the largest carbon footprint (Al Gore).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JALhazmat said:

This Ineos is poison Shite pisses me off! 

You think land rover one of the biggest 4x4 brands gave a shit about building clean energy vehicles?

emirates, airbus etc yup we run or build fucking huge planes burning tonnes of fossil fuel every hour and yet they are not held up as ‘bad’

Nescafé kiwi coffee sponsors  with all the stupid coffee pods that don’t break down contributing hugely to plastic contamination.

Not at all,  but as soon as a self made billionaire gets involved fuck me don’t all the bleeding hearts come out all upset.

the AC is not an environmentally sound premis, building single use race boats from carbon fibre and other chemically derived compounds and then flying them around the world for a tv audience  and a big corporate shin dig is not what you do when you are worried about environmental impact.

how have people lost sight of any of that? 

 

 

 

 

Well fucking said! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, so, apart from the contaminated waste, frackking is super clean?

Ah so not nuclear then? Apart from the contaminated waste that's pretty clean too no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tangentially related and new to me: from https://hyc.ie/news/693-shane-diviney-finishes-gc32-racing-tour-with-podium-celebration

‘Next year’s plans will be even more interesting’ Shane explained, ‘when we’ll see the GC32 Racing Tour merge with the Extreme Sailing Series which should mean we can expect at least 12 teams at each event.’

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JALhazmat said:

This Ineos is poison Shite pisses me off! 

You think land rover one of the biggest 4x4 brands gave a shit about building clean energy vehicles?

emirates, airbus etc yup we run or build fucking huge planes burning tonnes of fossil fuel every hour and yet they are not held up as ‘bad’

Nescafé kiwi coffee sponsors  with all the stupid coffee pods that don’t break down contributing hugely to plastic contamination.

Not at all,  but as soon as a self made billionaire gets involved fuck me don’t all the bleeding hearts come out all upset.

the AC is not an environmentally sound premis, building single use race boats from carbon fibre and other chemically derived compounds and then flying them around the world for a tv audience  and a big corporate shin dig is not what you do when you are worried about environmental impact.

how have people lost sight of any of that? 

 

 

 

 

I couldn’t agree more if I wanted to. This is classic “bitch about the source, but ignore who created the need” hypocrisy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rgeek said:

Ah, so, apart from the contaminated waste, frackking is super clean?

Ah so not nuclear then? Apart from the contaminated waste that's pretty clean too no?

Nope. Just lots of pot calling the kettle black going on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have all respect for Jim Ratcliffe, built a fortune, against stupid european bureaucracy and immigrationist policy, smart enough to live in Switzerland and Monaco.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Monkey said:

Nope. Just lots of pot calling the kettle black going on. 

May be. The pot and kettle are both black, is that what you're getting at?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Don't get enough of those. From all those (too) short videos, it looks promising.

Could Ineos be on its way to release a new 2 crew boat on the boat market? It does look attractive!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well yes, if you have a dedicated chase boat!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good stuff. Very clean 'wakes' off the foils - less turbulence than the cats IIRC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nav said:

Good stuff. Very clean 'wakes' off the foils - less turbulence than the cats IIRC

On the the AC50s, the vertical (surface piercing) portion of the L foils was used to limit leeway. On the AC75s, the bifurcated wing makes it possible to separate vertical lift from leeway resistance via the independent flaps on each 'leg' of the wing, so you probably won't be using the arm that connects the wing to the boat for much lift, and instead orient it for absolute minimum drag. That means far less foil wake at the water surface, but doesn't necessarily mean 'faster'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guess. But I wasn't just talking about the 'foil' but the rudder as well and in fact the wake well behind the boat as well as what you see happening close in

We are likely to see some setups tried that have little if any angle between the wings attached to the foil arm, which will make the separation you speculate about 'difficult'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ The rudder wake would be a decent speed indicator, since the rudder design isn't that different - roughly, less wake = slower - but since the test boat is about 60% of the size of an AC50, there are both scale effects plus the fact that the Reynolds number (which is a useful predictor of turbulence) for the same speed is quite different since it is directly proportional to the chord width of the foil. So I don't think you can tell much about the speed relative to known quantities like the AC50 from the wake.

Having said that, the thing is clearly ripping along.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that they appear to have trimmed the lower part of the bow off. My guess is this is to prevent tripping over it in touch downs. Reminds me of kite and windsurf foil boards cutting large chamfers on the rails..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as I liked the cats, the way Mini Frack looks zipping along, leads me to believe that the AC75 is going to be a superior boat and concept to what we saw in Bermuda, and what we'll see in the SailGP. With their two hulls, cross beams, and tramps, the cats look like they have far more windage, and are less aerodynamic while foiling. I reckon the mono will be quicker through manoeuvers, losing less speed in tacks/gybes, and not look so clumsy as the cats. The mono's won't have that scramble across the tramps either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, after 2 Cups of hamsters on tramps, will be a change!  Sustained peak heart rate and nimble web crossing seemed to be major skill set components in 34/35. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Horn Rock said:

As much as I liked the cats, the way Mini Frack looks zipping along, leads me to believe that the AC75 is going to be a superior boat and concept to what we saw in Bermuda, and what we'll see in the SailGP. With their two hulls, cross beams, and tramps, the cats look like they have far more windage, and are less aerodynamic while foiling. I reckon the mono will be quicker through manoeuvers, losing less speed in tacks/gybes, and not look so clumsy as the cats. The mono's won't have that scramble across the tramps either. 

You may be rifght, if yes, not sure if because of the monohull or the foils. I still wonder if the perfect concept is a cat with V foils.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, NeedAClew said:

Well, after 2 Cups of hamsters on tramps, will be a change!  Sustained peak heart rate and nimble web crossing seemed to be major skill set components in 34/35.

Not to mention, not falling off the boat.......

 

7 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

You may be rifght, if yes, not sure if because of the monohull or the foils. I still wonder if the perfect concept is a cat with V foils.

To me, the mono just looks a simpler more elegant solution. I'm guessing that the mono's will get way more forestay tension in a way not possible with the cats, which should make the rig work better, somewhat negating the advantages of the wing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't make the mistake of comparing these 'monos' with traditional monos though. That's like comparing Dirty Ernie's skidoo-powered lake racer with 'human-powered' cats.

Is there a category yet for sailboats with powered systems? Not real boats really - they still can't set official records in most cases for example right?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Horn Rock said:

Not to mention, not falling off the boat.......

 

To me, the mono just looks a simpler more elegant solution. I'm guessing that the mono's will get way more forestay tension in a way not possible with the cats, which should make the rig work better, somewhat negating the advantages of the wing.

Agreed on all that, however the weakness if the winward instability of the foiling mono, if they can settle that, then it is perhaps the most interesting solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

winward instability of the foiling mono, if they can settle that, then it is perhaps the most interesting solution.

It looked like Mini Frack was going upwind in the latest vid, but it's hard to know about overall stability from the clips we've seen so far, and how much if any, they've progressed since those wipe outs we saw. As a rule, mono's point higher than cats, although this can be negated by the cats extra speed. I suspect these foiling mono's will continue the trend of going higher to windward, but with a much tighter speed differential, resulting in much better VMG for the foiling mono upwind. Off the breeze is anyone's guess, with cats probably doing better in the lighter stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Horn Rock said:

It looked like Mini Frack was going upwind in the latest vid, but it's hard to know about overall stability from the clips we've seen so far, and how much if any, they've progressed since those wipe outs we saw. As a rule, mono's point higher than cats, although this can be negated by the cats extra speed. I suspect these foiling mono's will continue the trend of going higher to windward, but with a much tighter speed differential, resulting in much better VMG for the foiling mono upwind. Off the breeze is anyone's guess, with cats probably doing better in the lighter stuff.

I don't think so, higher speed and sailing like a trimaran when foiling will make it behave like a multi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

higher speed and sailing like a trimaran when foiling will make it behave like a multi

Tri's point higher upwind than cats do - stiffer, deck stepped rig, aligned centre board, just like a mono. Not totally comparable to the offset foils of the AC75 concept, but I'd be surprised if they don't point higher at a similar speed to the cats. All just speculation on my part though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Horn Rock said:

Tri's point higher upwind than cats do - stiffer, deck stepped rig, aligned centre board, just like a mono. Not totally comparable to the offset foils of the AC75 concept, but I'd be surprised if they don't point higher at a similar speed to the cats. All just speculation on my part though.

The F50's will point higher simply because of their wing and tiny headsail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Terry Hollis said:

The F50's will point higher simply because of their wing and tiny headsail.

You're probably right Terry, but Mini Fracks sails did look to have pretty good shape for a soft sail setup. Whether the twin sail mains of the AC75 can make up for the efficiency of the wing is unknown yet, but I suspect it will be closer than you imagine, with respect to the larger windage of the cats, and side slippage, as well as having the extra element in the water (dual rudders).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/20/2018 at 12:10 AM, hoom said:

Vid is broken for me

Works for me; there may even be a YT posted above somewhere, I forget.

anyway, some freeze frames 

 

105AE4F6-5F2B-46AA-88F9-41EF70DDFEF6.jpeg

8490539B-93B4-4C70-86E0-B3E0FCFC97B5.jpeg

1D994DB8-91D6-4DC3-B8D6-2D843054875B.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure about the discussion on how the new monos will be aerodynamically much cleaner than the cats. Mini frack has floats hanging off either side, deck spreaders, plus the big windward foil in the air. It looks like it has plenty of aero drag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fireball said:

I'm not sure about the discussion on how the new monos will be aerodynamically much cleaner than the cats. Mini frack has floats hanging off either side, deck spreaders, plus the big windward foil in the air. It looks like it has plenty of aero drag.

Agreed, however, remember we are still looking at a testing "mule" for comparison to auto industry. So what we are seeing here in no way represents the finished product.

I would expect to see everything faired to within in an inch of its life come race time. Much in the way, back in Godzilla vs. Alinghi - they pulled out beam fairings for everything and stripped off all unnecessary items - netting for one.

I dont imagine that you will see the floats at all - possibly an airbag type of device that could be deployed by stab buttons to try and save a capsize  from either hull side or outrigger tips - but nothing as clunky and draggy as seen here. 

The rigs also will mature rapidly into endplated and efficient power sources.

The interesting thing about this video is that bow modification - reminiscent of the JK/Origin "Star" bowed TP52. Must be in response to something, and tripping over a sharp knife like bow shape is as good a guess as any. Its rudimentary look suggests pure "mule" like treatment - what can we do that maximises testing time whilst giving a clearer path forward to a workable solution - they are marching into winter conditions where reduced daylight and suitable weather opportunities will be driving the programme as much as anything.

Time on water for both sailors and physical concepts, that can be validated for real life opration has just got to be so valuable, for what is otherwise pure speculation and simulation, albeit by the sharpest minds in modern NA.

Overall, most would be pleasantly pleased with the indications that this test boat has for the new AC class

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Boink said:

Agreed, however, remember we are still looking at a testing "mule" for comparison to auto industry. So what we are seeing here in no way represents the finished product.

I would expect to see everything faired to within in an inch of its life come race time. Much in the way, back in Godzilla vs. Alinghi - they pulled out beam fairings for everything and stripped off all unnecessary items - netting for one.

I dont imagine that you will see the floats at all - possibly an airbag type of device that could be deployed by stab buttons to try and save a capsize  from either hull side or outrigger tips - but nothing as clunky and draggy as seen here. 

The rigs also will mature rapidly into endplated and efficient power sources.

The interesting thing about this video is that bow modification - reminiscent of the JK/Origin "Star" bowed TP52. Must be in response to something, and tripping over a sharp knife like bow shape is as good a guess as any. Its rudimentary look suggests pure "mule" like treatment - what can we do that maximises testing time whilst giving a clearer path forward to a workable solution - they are marching into winter conditions where reduced daylight and suitable weather opportunities will be driving the programme as much as anything.

Time on water for both sailors and physical concepts, that can be validated for real life opration has just got to be so valuable, for what is otherwise pure speculation and simulation, albeit by the sharpest minds in modern NA.

Overall, most would be pleasantly pleased with the indications that this test boat has for the new AC class

 

.......

image.thumb.png.d01c9faa6825b87cc986ae51cea2d1cc.png

Who will go for the scow bow?

 

You're welcome....:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Fireball said:

I'm not sure about the discussion on how the new monos will be aerodynamically much cleaner than the cats. Mini frack has floats hanging off either side, deck spreaders, plus the big windward foil in the air. It looks like it has plenty of aero drag.

The test boat is significantly narrower than the AC75 (being designed for a completely different purpose originally), all the bits sticking out of it are simply to bring the geometry into line with what the AC75 will actually perform like.  Expect the AC75s to be much much cleaner than this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/19/2018 at 7:08 PM, Hemi said:

Also a surprising amount of anhedral on the foils.

Increasing anhedral allows them to further separate control of  'heave' (vertical lift) from leeway resistance (horizontal lift) when the foil arm is set to maximum extension. This could be a very useful tool, and you can clearly see that they have increased the anhedral from the initial design. Typical scenarios:

Upwind: vertical lift* set quite high due to lower speed, horizontal lift* set to max, to induce negative leeway (this is already happening on kite and windsurf foils to varying degrees, with the kites being clear leaders)

Downwind: Vertical lift* set lower (less required due to much higher speed), horizontal lift* set to zero or even negative to maximise VMG towards a downwind mark.

* In each case, I am referring to the lift coefficient of the submerged (leeward) foil relative to the two axis (Z = vertical, Y = horizontal)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, surfsailor said:

Increasing anhedral allows them to further separate control of  'heave' (vertical lift) from leeway resistance (horizontal lift) when the foil arm is set to maximum extension. This could be a very useful tool, and you can clearly see that they have increased the anhedral from the initial design. Typical scenarios:

Upwind: vertical lift* set quite high due to lower speed, horizontal lift* set to max, to induce negative leeway (this is already happening on kite and windsurf foils to varying degrees, with the kites being clear leaders)

Downwind: Vertical lift* set lower (less required due to much higher speed), horizontal lift* set to zero or even negative to maximise VMG towards a downwind mark.

* In each case, I am referring to the lift coefficient of the submerged (leeward) foil relative to the two axis (Z = vertical, Y = horizontal)

Can you elaborate the part in bold?  - seems to be counterintuitive.

Agree about the separation of anhedral - but surely having each operate in their separate X and Y axis (i.e. 90 degree perpendicular surfaces) is the optimum for running both at minimum sizes with resultant reductions in drag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok guys, how fast?  I grabbed a clip of the video that shows the length of the GB boat passing by the stern of the spectator boat.  my software says that it take 0.6 seconds for the length of the GB boat to pass by.  Some of you may have better timing software and know the length of the GB boat so we can calculate the speed.  We can also look up the wind speed at the time.  have fun...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Boink said:

Can you elaborate the part in bold?  - seems to be counterintuitive.

Agree about the separation of anhedral - but surely having each operate in their separate X and Y axis (i.e. 90 degree perpendicular surfaces) is the optimum for running both at minimum sizes with resultant reductions in drag.

It is counterintuitive, and it might not turn out to be fast, but it is definitely possible. Imagine a wing with 90 degrees between the two legs - at some point when rotating the foil arm, one leg of that wing will be horizontal (parallel to the water surface, which means it can ONLY generate lift in the Z axis) and the other leg will be vertical (perpendicular to the water surface, which means it can ONLY generate lift in the Y axis). Since the flaps can be controlled independently, you would set the horizontal leg at whatever Cl was required to support the weight of boat plus/minus what ever downforce/upforce is being created by the rig, and have total freedom to set the vertical leg however you wanted. One possible upwind setting would be with so much lift that the leeway angle went negative - IE, the boats course thru the water is closer to the wind than the direction the bow was pointing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is where these boats will shine, lift. Where 35 was limited by cant angles and L foils, the Mercedes star foil ( credit nav I think), will have one winglet dedicated to lift.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, surfsailor said:

It is counterintuitive, and it might not turn out to be fast, but it is definitely possible. Imagine a wing with 90 degrees between the two legs - at some point when rotating the foil arm, one leg of that wing will be horizontal (parallel to the water surface, which means it can ONLY generate lift in the Z axis) and the other leg will be vertical (perpendicular to the water surface, which means it can ONLY generate lift in the Y axis). Since the flaps can be controlled independently, you would set the horizontal leg at whatever Cl was required to support the weight of boat plus/minus what ever downforce/upforce is being created by the rig, and have total freedom to set the vertical leg however you wanted. One possible upwind setting would be with so much lift that the leeway angle went negative - IE, the boats course thru the water is closer to the wind than the direction the bow was pointing.

 

I get all that. That is what I was trying to convey to you that I did understand.

What I do not get is your use of the language "to induce negative leeway". It is, frankly, confusing and too open to interpretation - which you have not provided.

I am hoping that you are trying to describe that you could generate sufficient (even excess) lift that the craft no longer generates leeway - but actively climbs to weather (upwind at least). Downwind this trait is actually deterimental to VMG.

So. assuming that this IS what you are describing - what needs to be carefully considered here is what is actually happening to the whole platform when the vertical foil is twisted to do as I think you are saying.

What I think is being missed her is the important distiction between Kite Foils and Windurfers to any other foiling platform with a stayed rig - be that Test Boat or AC75.

What occurs is that on kite foilers and windsurfers the vertical element can be rotated independently of the rig which can continue to generate its power irrespective of platform direction. I think that the foil riders can feel throughtheir feet the amount of twist that the foils can run, without stalling or slowing too much. However, this is not the case with a stayed rig.

What will hapen is that if the foil is set to generate excess lift  - the whole plarform will instead rotate the bow down to leeward until the foil runs back into the equilibrium mode of runnings at an angle in the water where it's drag and lift are restored - i.e. normal(ish) angle of attack through the water.

What you have proposed is the eternal debate of gybing centreboards and all that they entail. So if history of these forums is anything to go by ( I think it was a discussion about 14's or David Hollom) ............ well I wish you luck. 

I do not believe it can currently be done any better than trying to run the whole show at zero leeway with a foil that can trimmed in AOA (either bodilly or through trim tabs) and mimimal size to give the lowest drag possible and thereby create the highest VMG achieveable.

Happy to stand corrected and educated by anyone who can make a reasoned argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK I got the vid to work, seems to have been an IPv6 issue.

Looks pretty quick, stable & high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Boink said:

I get all that. That is what I was trying to convey to you that I did understand.

What I do not get is your use of the language "to induce negative leeway". It is, frankly, confusing and too open to interpretation - which you have not provided.

I am hoping that you are trying to describe that you could generate sufficient (even excess) lift that the craft no longer generates leeway - but actively climbs to weather (upwind at least). Downwind this trait is actually deterimental to VMG.

So. assuming that this IS what you are describing - what needs to be carefully considered here is what is actually happening to the whole platform when the vertical foil is twisted to do as I think you are saying.

What I think is being missed her is the important distiction between Kite Foils and Windurfers to any other foiling platform with a stayed rig - be that Test Boat or AC75.

What occurs is that on kite foilers and windsurfers the vertical element can be rotated independently of the rig which can continue to generate its power irrespective of platform direction. I think that the foil riders can feel throughtheir feet the amount of twist that the foils can run, without stalling or slowing too much. However, this is not the case with a stayed rig.

What will hapen is that if the foil is set to generate excess lift  - the whole plarform will instead rotate the bow down to leeward until the foil runs back into the equilibrium mode of runnings at an angle in the water where it's drag and lift are restored - i.e. normal(ish) angle of attack through the water.

What you have proposed is the eternal debate of gybing centreboards and all that they entail. So if history of these forums is anything to go by ( I think it was a discussion about 14's or David Hollom) ............ well I wish you luck. 

I do not believe it can currently be done any better than trying to run the whole show at zero leeway with a foil that can trimmed in AOA (either bodilly or through trim tabs) and mimimal size to give the lowest drag possible and thereby create the highest VMG achieveable.

Happy to stand corrected and educated by anyone who can make a reasoned argument.

Ok, I totally missed the point of your question. My bad. By 'negative leeway' I simply meant that the course relative to the TWA would be a tighter angle than the angle between longitudinal centerline of the hull and the TWA. And yes, another way to unpack that is - given a course relative to the TWA - that more lift on the vertical foil leg would let you rotate the entire hull and rig away from the TWA, and less lift would rotate the entire rig and hull towards the TWA. 

On the cats, they could just rotate the wing, since the slot was part of the wing architecture, and the jib was largely inconsequential. But the AC 75s will be using head sails, so all of a sudden, there is a trade off between widening the slot and platform drag (since both increase as you increase foil lift in the Y axis. I could imagine there might be gains to be made doing that in light foiling conditions.

As for downwind, as I noted in my original post, you could invert the flap on the vertical foil leg to increase leeway, kind of like leeway coupling on steroids.

My overall point here is that - since these designs introduce multiple additional foil control parameters - there are a huge range of potential sailing modes that need to be explored. INEOs - with the increased anhedral on the foil in the latest video - seems to be going down the path of more control isolation.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It might make it easier to think about, keeping the two foil wings separate. The angle between the frackers' wings makes this even more tempting, but in the end it is all resolved by one resultant force. Given that the entire foil including both wings on the end can be set as high or low as you like, (unlike most foils to date), isn't using both wings in parallel to generate the lift and setting the arm 'height' to control the direction of that lift also a consideration? That thinking is certainly suggested by the relatively 'straight' wings offered in early graphics from the other 3 teams.

The counter argument would include the loss of rm by not being at max beam all the time........

Let's see if the others actually build to with their early ideas - as INEOS has so far.

 

Someone above suggested the angle between ITUK's wings had increased recently. Not sure it's any different from earlier, but I do think the boat has been running with different port and starboard patterns at times

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, nav said:

It might make it easier to think about, keeping the two foil wings separate. The angle between the frackers' wings makes this even more tempting, but in the end it is all resolved by one resultant force. Given that the entire foil including both wings on the end can be set as high or low as you like, (unlike most foils to date), isn't using both wings in parallel to generate the lift and setting the arm 'height' to control the direction of that lift also a consideration? That thinking is certainly suggested by the relatively 'straight' wings offered in early graphics from the other 3 teams.

The counter argument would include the loss of rm by not being at max beam all the time........

Let's see if the others actually build to with their early ideas - as INEOS has so far.

Yes, there are definitely tradeoffs. If you resolve the lift of both foils to a single vector, increasing anhedral does two things simultaneously:

1) Increases the range of angles that vector can act relative to the rotating arm (in a given arm position)

2) Either reduces the maximum available magnitude (lift) or increases drag (more frontal area for same lift)

It may well be that INEOs is simply going for more discrete control in the testing phase, especially since their smaller, lighter mule is intrinsically less stable than the full size boats will be.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Herfy said:

ok guys, how fast?

If it's 0.6s and 28' LOA, then it's 27.6kts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, surfsailor said:

Ok, I totally missed the point of your question. My bad. By 'negative leeway' I simply meant that the course relative to the TWA would be a tighter angle than the angle between longitudinal centerline of the hull and the TWA. And yes, another way to unpack that is - given a course relative to the TWA - that more lift on the vertical foil leg would let you rotate the entire hull and rig away from the TWA, and less lift would rotate the entire rig and hull towards the TWA. 

On the cats, they could just rotate the wing, since the slot was part of the wing architecture, and the jib was largely inconsequential. But the AC 75s will be using head sails, so all of a sudden, there is a trade off between widening the slot and platform drag (since both increase as you increase foil lift in the Y axis. I could imagine there might be gains to be made doing that in light foiling conditions.

As for downwind, as I noted in my original post, you could invert the flap on the vertical foil leg to increase leeway, kind of like leeway coupling on steroids.

My overall point here is that - since these designs introduce multiple additional foil control parameters - there are a huge range of potential sailing modes that need to be explored. INEOs - with the increased anhedral on the foil in the latest video - seems to be going down the path of more control isolation.

 

Glad to see we think in similar terms.

Where I do differ is the statement in Bold. If you allow the foil to invert to increase leeway, then ultimately the sail rig has less to "lean" on and drops to an overall lower power status.

Now, if you are butting up to foil cavitation issues; because total power generated by both hydro and aero foils allows a boat speed in excess of where foil cavitation is induced, then Yes accepting more leeway will keep the whole package on maximum velocity just under cavitation but at a lower course sailed which translates to better overall VMG. But if this threshold has not been reached, then more leeway is not optimal.

I think there are many shades of grey at play - dependent on many things. 

Also the AC75 rule outlines a "Box" that the bifurcated tips must sit within, at the end of the supporting strut - and if I have interpreted it correctly, then 90 degree juctions or even Equilateral type "Mercedes Star" layouts are prohibited.

There is absolutely no doubt that Team UK have increased anhedral from first launch - but are probably/possibly at the limit already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Increase in Anhedral of the tip foils can be clearly seen from July 25 photo - first seen to Oct 9 - video clip stills from this thread - photo.

There was an interesting asymmetrical shape shown in the Aug 31 photo, but superceeded since.

We can only speculate that curved surfaces are harder to interpret what the sailors are feeling/experiencing - whereas the straight sections are both easier to produce and easier to correlate findings for - whether they be outright velocity gains or improvement in control and/or stability, allowing faster prototyping and more design space to be covered with realtime testing.

Not unreasonable to expect layout to end up a hybrid of both types - i.e. increased anhedral but with curved surfaces - to allow the best compromise of both speed and control and yet still be capable of being "packed" within the limitations of the rules box space - centreline storage, arc, span, socket length etc.

 

Ineos Test Boat July 25.jpg

Ineos Test Boat Oct 19.jpg

Ineos Test Boat Aug 31.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Thinking less anhedral for light wind foils to facilitate early take off and staying on the foils during transitions, and more anhedral for highwind foils for better control and to better isolate control of lift from control of leeway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like much broader flatter foils for maximum lift in sub 10 knot conditions.  Getting along very nicely on a broad reach in pretty light conditions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/25/2018 at 5:58 PM, Mozzy Sails said:

More T5, very different foil shape to the above. 

 

I believe all the other clips, but this one looks like CGI. Such beautiful, regular spray to leeward...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yup, having done a bunch of particle animation the decay of the leeward spray from 00:12 to 00:15 looks fake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beginning to sound like those wankers who said the pictures of the ETNZ 72 foiling were photoshop. What possible reason could they have for faking that video. They have far better things to do with their time than faking videos.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, A Class Sailor said:

Beginning to sound like those wankers who said the pictures of the ETNZ 72 foiling were photoshop. What possible reason could they have for faking that video. They have far better things to do with their time than faking videos.

Have to say I agree... not sure who would bother 3d modelling the T5 is such detail for the sake of this...including spectral rainbow in the spray as the light is cast (are they ray-tracing too?) ;-)

1735063293_ScreenShot2018-10-29at4_51_50PM.png.d88df7281245e64eab5d455a95e7d0d3.png

What I can tell you is that this footage is slowed down (it's at least twice as slow as captured), and some of what looks like 'wash' is actually 'spray' hence not living as long as you'd expect... Play it twice as fast and it looks much more realistic...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites