Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Icedtea

Prime Computer Skiff

Recommended Posts

According to Wikipedia the 49er is derived from an 18ft skiff design that was a doubleheader, called prime computer.

Can't find any info/pics online, anyone know the story?

A doublehanded 18footer sounds like a handful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Julian Bethwaite' various books there's quite a lot of information on these boats.

 

He'll probably be here soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Photos of the Pr1me series seem hard to find. There's one in the first High Performance Sailing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Photos of the Pr1me series seem hard to find. There's one in the first High Performance Sailing.

In light air with Julian and crew double-trapping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got one of the 2 handed, ?balsa? & glass boat when a few 18s went on a road trip to Kingston, Ontario in about 1984. The negative's long gone, but I'll have to see if I can dig out the picture. It's around somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to see it, especially as I don't really see why you'd want 2 crew when you can have 3.

Many hands make light work and all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to see it, especially as I don't really see why you'd want 2 crew when you can have 3.

Many hands make light work and all

Many hands make many schedule conflicts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to see it, especially as I don't really see why you'd want 2 crew when you can have 3.

Many hands make light work and all

No restriction on wing width so plenty of righting moment available and one less crew means a 20% increase in power to weight ratio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Prime 18's were a development of the 1976 KB Frank did for Dave Porter.

 

There were 3 Primes, the first was around 82-83, the forward hand had to end for end the pole on gybes, that would have been a handful,the bookies had it at 80/1 so a bit of a dud.

JJ won by Sorenson Tia Maria

 

The 2nd Prime was for 83-84 it was Balsa/S glass ,hull weight 45Kg,big mast 10.3 m,wingspan 19ft 8 inches (Same as Tia Maria),it was a good boat.

JJ won by Sorenson

 

The last Prime had a 25ft wingspan,Balsa S Glass, bigger rigs, it was one of the fastest 18's ever built in light winds,not so good in fresh to frightening,when the 3 handers increased wingspan to 25ft + they were much faster.

JJ won by Bradmill with 32ft wingspan.

 

The Balsa S Glass Primes were fantastic looking boats the workmanship in those boats was outstanding,with carbon spars and synthetic rigging they would have looked even better.

 

There were other 2 handers built for Colorbond Qld,Jeremy Sharp and Adam South built a modified Murray 2 hander.

 

The Festival of Sydney cup footage from Channel 9 would be good to find it has the last 25ft wingspan Prime as well as the 3 handers in a fairly decent wind.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly, they are my Fathers books, not mine. I'm not that smart.

 

The First Prime was a stretched Tasar, built over a Easter long weekend. It was sailed by Ian Hobbs, Alex (pussy) Heron (now Mrs Iain Murray) and myself.

It is true than when sailed 2 up, it was a hand full especially the pole, and we had wire braces in those days. It was this complexity that made us go to the asymmetric fixed bow spirit the next year on Prime Mk2.

 

The second Prime, was purpose designed & built, started life as PVC foam core, but I meet Arnie Duckworth (guy behind balteck) and so we started the Balsa boats. Jeremy (blunt) Sharp brought the PVC boat and sailed it well, and we finished the Balsa boat, with a Asymmetric pole in place, sailed it on a wonderful winters day in Sydney in June then shipped it to San Francisco, when on to Kingston (CAN) and then on to Newport where we won that cup. That boat was sailed by Michael (doc) Wilson (now a cadiothoratic surgeon here in Sydney) and myself. It had gold and moron sails.

 

The 3rd prime was a piece of work, and I mean that in the best possible way. Craig (Rambo) Ramsden was a 3 year chippie, so I took over his apprenticeship, and he was quite extraordinary in building the boat with Jack (snoger) Godfrey. Jack was a master machinist (hi end chippie) and 30 year older that Rambo, but that boat we varied the balsa from 15mm thick in the bottom to 6 mm thick in the topside and we have 1mm thick aircraft ply frames every 1ft (300mm) down the length of the boat. Whole boat weigh under 100lbs finished without wings. Wings 7000 series aircraft alloy, 32ft #1 rig, 25ft wings, pretty amazing boat. And it was still sailing 12 years latter, as a 3 hander.

 

There was a 2 handed Color Bond 18teen also in Brisbane sailed by Jeff Berg (of all Yacht Spars fame) with Shane Fairweather who ended up my best man and a pilot with the Australian Air Force.

 

OK, just being pretty pedantic on who sailed on these boats because lots of people claimed to have but I have never meet them.

 

Prime Mk3 was 84-85.

 

In 1989 it was the actual Prime Mk3 that we took and turned into a plug to make the B18. That work was done by Boatspeed up in Gosford.

 

It is that hull shape, that holds the NE course record (as this is a hot topic at present during the 18ft world championships)

 

It is off that hull shape that we full size tested and came up with the B18, Mk1, Mk2, Mk3, Mk3b and the Mk3c.

 

Looney Tunes was a Mk3c.

 

The 49er is based heavily on the Mk2 and Mk1.

The 29er is based heavily on the Mk3b

 

That may sound arse about as it was the Mk3b that sported the spray rail, but that aside,B18 Mk1's are very arguably the fastest 18teen ever in terms of top end, 3 rig, heart in your mouth rocket ships!

 

I have some photos, let me see if I can dig them out, got asked about this the other day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JUlian what was the NE record and breeze strength and direction.

 

Funny 10.3 m mast on the first is not too far off what a 12 carries now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that Julian- 32ft wingspan sounds all kinds of crazy.

Never knew skiffs were that insane at any one point in time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prime had a 32ft MAST not a wing span.

 

Its wingspan was 25ft.

 

Its was Rob Brown's Entrad that had 33ft wings which I did sail on latter that year, and yes it was very strange. Hull would go up and down and then the outer wing bar would follow 10-15sec latter.

 

Re the NE course record, lots of suggestions, started by Warwick Rooklyn asking me a bunch of question few days back, by text and latter by phone (he is commentating on SA 18footer coverage) and latter by David Witt and then by a number of sailors in the boat park yesterday.

 

About 2 years ago, I got a phone call from Maka who had Nobiro Ono, man responsible for most of the really hi end Carbon Fibre, in his office with a present for me. About 10 DVD's full of photos and really old, as in turn of the century (1900ish) video's and a bunch of photo's and scans. One of those scans is a Kazzi magazine with a report on the 1992-3 wolrd championships, but its all in Japanese and I dont read Japanese.

 

Apparently (according to Warwick) the best speed 7 has done the NE course in about 70mins. I personally find that quite hard to believe.

 

This week a 3rd partly who is eminently qualified suggested to David Witt that he (and I with Andrew Hay) did it in 63-64 mins in AAMI in 1993-4.

 

And the Kazzi magazine, what I can read of it suggest we (Peter (Rev) Warner and Peter (Larry) Loudon and myself sailing a earlier AAMI) did it in a time somewhat shy of 50 mins. Infact Warwick who came second that day did it sub 60 mins and all that happened January or February 1992.

 

Same course, etc etc. The 1992-3-4-5 boats all had 17ft wings with alloy lower masts & wings, fiberglass hulls, foam core, etc etc.

 

I have very strong memories of that day, pretty special, not overly fresh, Im guessing 22-25knts, NE, do remember coming out of the Beashal Bouy on the long down-wing run and gybing in Taylor Bay. That would make the wind, NNE. Would have lead to longish port tacks, short stb tacks up the northern shore. 3-4 digs, probably.

 

Anyway, memories, great things to have, not sure it needs to be un-earthed any further as these are very different boats targeting a very different ethos!

 

JB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Julian-

 

Why did you have wire braces on Prime Mk1 when nobody else was using wire braces?

 

Your father has 36ft mast for Mk 3 and you are saying 32ft, who should we believe with that one you or your father?

 

Entrad was 22ft wingspan under the rules of that year, do you have any pics or evidence of Entrad being wider than 22ft?

 

The League had 14ft wingspan in the 1990's after the split with GPS,Spies had 2 sets of wings 14ft and 17ft depending on which club he sailed with, did you set your course record at the league?

 

Who held the NE course record before you claimed it?

 

I think you need color photos to really show how nice the balsa Primes looked these B&W ones don't quite cut it.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Julian,

 

While you are here, Is there anything new in the 9er family on the drawing board ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That Prime Mkiii photo Julian posted does exist in colour (or at least used to exist) and is stunning. It was used as a cover photo by Yachts and Yachting magazine in the UK many years ago, and when I did a retrospective for them I wanted it as the headline photo of the article, but all they did was a thumbnail of the actual cover, which was disappointing, but maybe there were problems getting a clean copy/rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NE course is about 12 nautical miles in a straight line. The course is pretty much 45 degrees so any shift to the North makes it very biased to port tack upwind and you can lay Shark in one leg down wind with the leg to Clark becomes a reach.



In a NE upwind is about 2.8 miles upwind and downwind about 2.3 (Shark doesn't make a big difference in angle) , if we look at a 2:1 upwind to downwind ratio you would have to average 15 knots upwind and 30 downwind to do it in 50 minutes, to do it 70 minutes is about 10 upwind and 20 downwind this assumes tacking through 80 deg and gybing through 60



Move the breeze to 020 and the course becomes 2.5 upwind and 2.2 downwind and at the numbers above for a 70 minutes speed you would do it in about 60 minutes



Julian had to average 13 upwind and 26 downwind at 020 to hit 50 minutes, gybing in taylor bay matches the breezes being in the north, so even if it was in a NNE breeze it is still faster than the 70 minute race the other day in the NE brreeze



post-720-0-56495200-1424685315_thumb.jpgpost-720-0-26823400-1424685312_thumb.jpg


post-720-0-97850200-1424685320_thumb.jpgpost-720-0-25384500-1424685318_thumb.jpg


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, 40 questions. Shit.

 

Yep, Dad made an error, biggest Prime rig was 32ft.

 

I made an error, It was Bradmill that had 33ft wings, and at the end of that year we all took a cold shower and brought in a wing width rule which I think was 21ft 5" (6.5m) (I was the sailing secretary/director of the League in those days)

 

Entrad had 21' ft 5" wings.

 

Wire braces, simply, with a 2 hander, the pole simply never came off the forestay, has to do with power to weight ratio, whereas the 3 handers still "braced back". It was just one less thing to do.

 

Speeds, look, as I said, these where very different boats, very different ethos. Most of the crews where professional. My crew got paid every time the boat sailed, so we sailed hard 4 days a week. They also got traded, so if we won an event, they were worth more. Charlie and Cameron after our first year got snapped up by Ella Bache. And good luck to them, but they never won again. All very amicable, I'm going sailing with Witty on the 100fter in a week or 2.

 

With AAMI, my crew got paid $250/sailing day, so we sailed Tues, Thurs, Sat & Sun. They earnt $1k/w and for a 20 something in early 90's that was bloody fantastic.

 

And almost by definition, I could not keep a crew, so others where offering more.

 

You don’t try until you are pushed, and when you are pushed every weekend, and pushed hard, and when the consequences are so financially painful for the crew, all the BS goes out the window. (those huge square heads are just dumb!!!!)

 

I can't comment on other skippers, but I was not paid to sail, I was paid to manage quite a big sponsorship, same size as the Wallabies, and more effective BTW.

 

The other thing I must say is that the 3 things that made me more successful over all the others was that I went gliding every opportunity I could, and every time I did that, my performance improved in a tangible and measurable quantity. We did a European campaign every year that simply double the learning curve/time. And the 3rd thing was Dad, an un-believable resource!

 

Anyone who has sailed on Sydney harbour, you know if the wind is N of NE you hit the northern shore. How far you come out depends on the tide line. Coming down wind, again you head north, so you come around the Beashal Bouy, go through the “mystery zone”, you don't gybe, you send it. Coming out of Taylor bay, we could not make the Clark Island Mark.

 

And also this is over 20 years ago, and the memory is a tad fuzzy. But Dad did do a article for Australian Sailing and in that, I can remember the then great late Commodore Bill Miller in his pristine whites holding up the race sheet. And yes, the average though the water speeds up wind where mid to high teens, down wind, mid to high 20s, did we go over 30, don’t know!

 

But they are very different boats, today’s boats are designed to be able to be sailed by Weekend Warriors. A few of them take it seriously!

 

We hit the water 1st week of July, and we where sailing 3-4 day per week through to September, then we put in all new rigs (old ones where trashed) and 4 days a week, every week through to February when the cycle started again. By the time you went to Europe in May June, the new boat was ½ built.

 

Until you get 5-6 teams equally and sufficiently funded with another 6 coming up behind, and you have enough freedom to play we won’t see it again.

 

But I have no doubt we will see it again, these things are all cyclical, and what Frank and Woody are doing there is amazing and extraordinary and all power to them and I hope they are nurturing the next explosion, only I think it will come from Europe.

 

Re me and what am I up to, trying to crack China, and until we crack China, we will never crack Asia. It’s been 3 years. CC tomorrow morning to re-sign for another 3 years.

 

Yes that dose include some new boats, and I hope they will breathe real life into the industry, but it requires a real shift in thinking.

 

Upside is there are some very significant players on every continent all supporting what I am doing. I some ways, the support I have now is greater than what we had with the 49er and 29er. It’s very exciting.

 

JB

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With those extreme rack lengths were there any ever attempts to "flatten" them out as in bending the last 5 or so feet to be more parellel with the water? I assume that would cause a lot of addition stress on the rack tubes and the weight/strength wouldn't be worth it but with how prolific carbon fiber is would something like that be worth a try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With those extreme rack lengths were there any ever attempts to "flatten" them out as in bending the last 5 or so feet to be more parellel with the water? I assume that would cause a lot of addition stress on the rack tubes and the weight/strength wouldn't be worth it but with how prolific carbon fiber is would something like that be worth a try.

The wings used to be parallel to the water on the windward side, the leeward one would pivot upwards.

 

Early 80's a couple of Sydney skiffs travelled to Canberra, the wind was in the 0-5knt range, they had huge aluminium rigs, wide wings.

 

The Commodore of the local club owned an 18 from the late 60's, smaller rig, no wings. He grabbed a skiff moth sailor to do mainsheet, I was up front (might have pushed 50kg dripping wet at that stage), sails were all second hand.

 

Guess who won.... The old skiff with no wings. The new boats spent all their time dragging the racks around with the changes in wind strength.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big (20ft plus) racks where all hung of the trapeze strop. Front and back, There where under wing guys/diamonds, struts to keep them all together and yes, they bent a lot.

 

The AAMI type wing was cantilevered, we did have a front wing wire, though we probably could have survived without it.

But we did not have a aft one, and in the early days against the boats with a aft wing wire, our pre start bear-aways where always tighter and more controlled.

 

By the time we where using Carbon beams (Mk2 so 1993-4) we did away with wing wires all together.

 

Throw in another interesting tid-bit. Early "flip flop" wing where covered in chick-a-pea, that mesh you see on Hobies and as we now know, the vacuum generated by the leeward side of the sail, particularly at the slot, occasionally sucked the wings up into the rigging. Think about it for a second, take a 18teen, screw it 45° to the wind and the flow over the leeward wing has to be downwards but the low pressure/vacuum was enough to lift a 20kg wing up into the rigging. Did a test on a moth not so long ago and go a similar result. No wonder the C-class, A-Class, AC boats end-plate and the 49er cuff works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And those wings had the tendency to invert at inconvenient times...painful

Yep Spezie one Wednesday night right in front of the CYC twilight fleet - it was a joy to watch a slow painful capsize by the stern

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And those razor sharp whisker wires! A trip around the front never ended well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

those huge square heads are just dumb!!!!

 

What do you mean, "Flash Gordon approaching"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got one of the 2 handed, ?balsa? & glass boat when a few 18s went on a road trip to Kingston, Ontario in about 1984. The negative's long gone, but I'll have to see if I can dig out the picture. It's around somewhere.

I also saw this boat in Kingston. Three 18s were touring North America. On the day I was at KYC Sharon Greene showed up to take some photos. The balsa glass construction was interesting. As a 505 sailor I was intrigued to learn they had built a balsa and glass 505 first, then built the double handed 18.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Julian

 

Serious question for historical accuracy. While there is no doubt that the boats you are talking about were significantly quicker than the current 18's - lighter, wider, more sail, better hullshape (but harder to sail) it would be a surprise if they weren't - there seems to be some question about whether the NorEaster course is still the same as it was when you set your record time. I wasn't in Oz then, but i have been told by at least 2 of the old timers that the course is now longer. In fact, I had thought that either you or Harry had told me as well, but I could be mistaken on that! In addition, I had always believed that the marks (all or at least the Beashal) were rounded to port back then, when they are now rounded to Starboard. Your post above suggests that as well, saying you simply pull away at the top mark, don't gybe and head north. Of course, which way around wouldn't make that much difference to overall times, but it would be interesting to at least get things historically accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On rereading my post, I realise that Shark has always been left to starboard!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huge square head mains are simply very high drag. Plus a lot of sail area = lots of surface friction.

 

The old 18teens had much smaller sail area, not more.

 

And as far as I know the NE course has been the same, or let me put it another way, don't think the Pigs, Shark Island or Clark Island have moved very far. The only increase in course length would be that you now go around a mark about 10m from the totem pole, where as before you just went around the TP.

 

But Simon your right, we would have come around the windward mark and gybe set to get into Taylor bay.

 

Its the SFS that had the shorter NE course, last time up you went to Chowder Bay and then had that screaming 2 sail reach to the top of Shark Island befor setting to the finish off Clark.

 

The League course has always been 3 times to the Pigs. Triangle, windward return, triangle!

 

JB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really great thread, lots of neat info.

 

Curious, where is the optimum for a square head main? Been discussed before but I'm not sure in the context of the 18 foot skiff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can give you my 10c's, but I have every expectation that there will be at-least 10 other POV's!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Julian. I think some people (including myself) must be getting confused because of the SFS course vs the League.

 

The sail area/fat head mains is always interesting. On a number of occasions, when the fleet were split in the choice of small vs big rigs, we got caught with a small rig on a big rig day. Yet despite the reduced area, lower mast etc., I always believed that we were very competitive upwind. It was downhill that we got killed. I believed that as soon as the big rigs were just past 3 stringing, they were depowering which equals drag and that the smaller, more efficient rig could hold its own. I should add that we tended towards the lighter end of the crew weight range and I don't know if that was a factor. .

 

So, in short, I agree with Julian about big rigs and oversized heads, at least for upwind work. The question i would have is whether the oversized square head sails have some benefit downhill with the kite up. I am thinking of those with a top batten that is way past horizontal and I wonder whether there is some aero benefit at the top of the rig> I am assuming that at the top of the kite there is something messy going on with the flow and that combines with the top of the mast to produce something even more messy. Could the upkicked head act to tidy up the airflow in that area?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am curious about who held the NE course record before Julian along with how much time he took off it.

 

Bob Ross reported in Australian Sailing August 1983 (Prime Mk2)-

The mast of the biggest rig on this years boat is 10.37m high compared with 9.76m last year.

The masts made by Goldspar's new spin tapered process are lighter- the number 1 about 17.25Kg compared to 26.3kg of last years biggest mast.

 

The published figures we have for mast heights-

Mk1- 9.76m

Mk2- 10.37m

Mk3- 36ft, Julian has pointed out Frank was wrong it's 32ft

 

There is footage of Prime mk2 in this video, it appears Julian also brought twin tiller extensions to the 18's so the skipper didn't have to take it with him when tacking-

www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPRRNfbcULA

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael (Trash Bags) Walsh in a Prudential from memory, but its a very long time ago.

 

I believe Warwick (wazza) Rooklyn in Eastern Express, beat Michael's record, not sure by how much and we beat Wazza by about 4-5 mins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am curious about who held the NE course record before Julian along with how much time he took off it.

 

Bob Ross reported in Australian Sailing August 1983 (Prime Mk2)-

The mast of the biggest rig on this years boat is 10.37m high compared with 9.76m last year.

The masts made by Goldspar's new spin tapered process are lighter- the number 1 about 17.25Kg compared to 26.3kg of last years biggest mast.

 

The published figures we have for mast heights-

Mk1- 9.76m

Mk2- 10.37m = 34 ft.

Mk3- 36ft, Julian has pointed out Frank was wrong it's 32ft

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couple of you have asked for photos, came across this one, last of the big boat ear, 1986-7.

21.5ft wings, this is the 41ft rig, early carbon tip, think its the #2.

 

Bloody stupid.

post-26198-0-82221700-1425961117_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But gloriously bloody stupid... At least for the spectators.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I notice that Hydraulics are creeping back into 18teens.

The GF had hydraulic fore-stay, shrouds, D2's and Vang.

 

the spin pole was 18-20ft long so we also had a drop bow foil otherwise it became impossible to steer.

 

But it was the best thing ever when we banned hydraulics, across all skiffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That photo with the sizes to put to scale are impressive to say the least. It looks like it would have been a frightening ride in anything that required wire-to-wire tacks and a beast to handle if something went sideways.

 

The hull is so narrow relative to the wingspan and height of the mast it is almost canoeish in the rear view.

 

Thanks for sharing Julian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

almost canoeish in the rear view.

 

Not a long way apart...

 

post-60-0-84190300-1426007480_thumb.jpg

 

You ought to have a serious go at one of those Mr Bethwaite: there's all sorts of interesting stuff that could be improved on aero drag and so on, and are you not tempted by the possibility of getting the Bethwaite name on the same trophy as Uffa Fox?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"are you not tempted by the possibility of getting the Bethwaite name on the same trophy as Uffa Fox? "

 

 

That really would be legendary-epic.

Besides, then you'd have no choice but to get yourself over to Rhode Island...


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

almost canoeish in the rear view.

 

Not a long way apart...

 

attachicon.gifskiffcanoe.jpg

 

You ought to have a serious go at one of those Mr Bethwaite: there's all sorts of interesting stuff that could be improved on aero drag and so on, and are you not tempted by the possibility of getting the Bethwaite name on the same trophy as Uffa Fox?

 

Wow, and that's with an old nethercott hull. Another win for the IC!

Julian, you in for another go on a canoe? Our loaner boats have got a lot quicker since you sailed redshift.

 

DRC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have sailed IC's a few time, first time was in fact Uffa Fox's original IC, which had being loving restored in the midlands, this was back in the early 90's. Then a few times here in Australia and lastest time was as a guest of Steve Clark in Ottawa of all places.

 

Happy to sail a IC or a moth or a multi hull any time, when it suits, but I have other agenda's right now that preclude that.

 

Really shocked and saddened by the death of Kim Allen a few nights ago, he and I had been playing with the keyball system, he is only a year older and a dam sight fitter! Bit scary!.

 

The industry can ill afford to loose people like that.

 

Its that sort of reality that focus's the mind! So can't see the need for my name on another mug right now, and I dare say there are better people than I, that would keep my name off it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I notice that Hydraulics are creeping back into 18teens.

The GF had hydraulic fore-stay, shrouds, D2's and Vang.

 

the spin pole was 18-20ft long so we also had a drop bow foil otherwise it became impossible to steer.

 

But it was the best thing ever when we banned hydraulics, across all skiffs.

 

...thanks JB for adding your perspective here.

 

...there was some mention of hydraulics in interviews after the Giltman...it sounds like there's at least a few that will want to vote them away again. Quite a huge advantage for 7 this year. I once messed with a ~30:1 on my 49er shrouds, it's quite something to be able to adjust on the fly! :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not my business, nor is it my problem!

 

When it was my business, they where on 16teens, and 12ves, as well as 18teens.

I can see a place for them on the vang as its getting stupidly powerful with Vang sheeting.

But we have seen it before even with 29ers, when people can they will, so a crew that is doing poorly will try anything and if that is a hand full of Hydraulics, they will.

 

29er goes well with 22-24 static on the fore-stay, in SFO in 2004 some where using double, 44-48 and that broke boats, and that's with a 29er, just imagine what would happen on a 49er or on a 18teen.

You will end up with 4mm wire, and that again will simply domino though the fleet.

 

Cost is always a driver, not for the elite directly, but for the WW [weekend warrior] and that in turn ends up effecting the RS [rock star]

 

Hydraulics = more $$$ = less players, on so many fronts. And its not just $$$ its complexity and time and hassle.

 

Again, not my problem!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even in big boats it got stupid. I remember one of JAck King's MERRYTHOUGHT 50s. That thing was hydroed to death. Lost a rig. Not sure but may have been related.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nothing better than slopping hydraulic fluid out of the bilge or falling on your ass trying to grab the #4 at night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Not a long way apart...

 

attachicon.gifskiffcanoe.jpg

 

 

Not to hijack this thread but as a purely qualitative comparison... well, the picture speaks for itself, except its worth pointing out that TalonF4U could hike 30% harder in this picture.

 

DRC

post-100627-0-25376200-1426037401_thumb.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Really shocked and saddened by the death of Kim Allen a few nights ago, he and I had been playing with the keyball system, he is only a year older and a dam sight fitter! Bit scary!.



The industry can ill afford to loose people like that."



Totally agree Julian, there's a number of us at that age now. Phil Y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prime Mk 3 was the only boat to use a hydraulic ram on the forestay it was mounted on the bowsprit,i remember looking at it wondering if that was a better way, nobody used them on the vang the range of movement would have been too small.

 

I have to agree with Frank on page 182 of his first book when he says the 18's were fastest with 7m wingspan,those who I sailed with agree on this point.

Julian had a break for a couple of seasons when wings had to be cut down to 16ft so he didn't see how much slower they were under the new rules

 

The younger sailors didn't think they were stupid boats we were too busy grinning from the rides, the older guys didn't like them as much, they were a great young mans boat.

 

Rob Brown ended the design domination by Murray with Bradmill,Entrad and Goodman fielder which was renamed Southern cross when it won a JJ.

Lots of good designs in that 2 year period,Lexcen,Nash,Payne,Jutson,Steinman and Bethwaite to name a few

 

The Goodman Fielder won the largest ever prizemoney in 18's, $50 thousand dollars for winning the first ever GP in Perth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both GF and Entrad had hydraulic vangs.

GF also had a adjustable hydraulic FS.

 

I sailed on both of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a few photos of Goodman Fielder in this book, there are no hydraulics on vang or FS in any of those photos, I will borrow a copy and scan them later.

 

www.ebay.com.au/itm/The-Eighties-Greatest-Yacht-Races-Gore-Philip-Pictorial-Hard-Cover-/351237637092

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re the Vang, you would not see it, the whole system was in the boom, slaves, masters, etc etc, all you would see is a fork attaching to the end of the piston.

 

They where specially made systems, about 15:1 so the Slave cylinder was quite big (dia) and had about a 5" throw, which was longer than usual, and the master was very long (15 x 5") but small (dia) hence putting the whole thing in the boom.

 

Fore-stay was tiny, std size, but small throw, forestays only get to 500kgs load, we did take it off down the track, simply not worth the hassle. But we did have trenches in the cockpit floor and along the foredeck to house all the masters, got very good at bending SS tube to handle the oil.

 

They did not blow up, once we went to SS tube, but they where still a pain in the arse and they where heavy.

 

Interestingly, one of the advantages of Hydraulics is you can put gauges on them and get accurate understanding of live operating rig tensions.

 

From memory there where 10-12 control systems on GF, rabbit warren of lines coming out to the fwd-hand (me).

 

Jib DH, Jib HL, Jib Angle. Main DH, Main Outhaul, Vang, D2, D3, FS, Bow Foil. FS, Spinnaker Tweak-er.

 

At one stage we even had Cap Shroud control.

 

Stupid really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the photos show a webbing strap holding a block for a conventional vang with the other side holding mainsheet block,the only hydraulics are for the shrouds and D2's, I will pick the book up after work.

 

It has also been pointed out on page 216 of Higher performance sailing- faster handling techniques your father said the NE course record is 49 minutes and a few seconds and this AAMI was built from Carbon epoxy when all the other B18 were glass polyester.

 

Building hulls from Carbon fibre was illegal under the class rules at that time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

julian, just read thru this thread and it is a cool history on 18s. for me at least

 

in the late 80s early 90s skiff racing was shown on a channel in the usa called speed vision. water wednesdays. we had a satellite dish in toronto and got the channel. i was glued to the tv on wednesday, watching all the boating shows and the racing.

 

i had never sailed, didn't live too close to water, and our lakefront cottage was only used in the winter to snowmobile on the ice. but i was hooked on skiffs.

 

i guess i had been watching you on tv. i have a few of the races video taped someplace. have one of the mckees doing a light air race in new zealand. have another where xerox or prudential shatter their carbon mast tip with all the pumping in the chop.

 

when i moved to vancouver i got into sailing and racing. and skiffs were always my favourite.

 

thanks for putting on a great show and helping to get me into the sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I find the time I will dig out the photos I have of GF and Entrad, anyway, back to more mundane matters.

 

Re the TV, your thanks need to be directed to Bill MacCartney! Lots of stories, remember one where a mate had just done the Everest climb, flew out of base camp settled into a hotel in Nepal somewhere, about to jump in the shower, turn on the TV and there where the 18teens. He reminded me of that only 4 days ago sailing classics (57ft Alden ketch, Wraith of Oden) out of Pittwater. And who was the RO, none other than Rob Brown. 6° of separation.

 

Also have the numbers of the 1998 49er worlds, Bandol, South of France, think it was 3/4 billion people watch it. But that was not MacCartney, that was Alex Gad.

 

Who says sailing cant be televised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it was amazing that there were helicopters and helmet cams used way back then. almost on par with formula 1. must have had some serious backing to be able to do that.

 

i can't remember where i heard it or who told me, but i was told that skiff racing was aired during the intermissions of cricket matches. true?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, Wide World of Sports, Channel 9.

 

$$$ wise, its $40,000 - $50,000 to make a commercial 1/2 hr.

Normally there where 4-5 programs from a weekend sailing.

So $1/4m per weekend.

That did not include the boats of-course.

 

I will see if I can find the lead in on Noburio's DVD's. That was pretty cool.

We out rated the Cricket, BTW, probably why it was pulled.

 

Headcams where initially a pain the the arse (head).

I remember a early one had a hammer head bolted to the other side as a counter weight.

It was about 3kg on your head and another 7kg on your back.

 

And didn't the trapeze wires love it!

 

JB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, Wide World of Sports, Channel 9.

 

$$$ wise, its $40,000 - $50,000 to make a commercial 1/2 hr.

Normally there where 4-5 programs from a weekend sailing.

So $1/4m per weekend.

That did not include the boats of-course.

 

I will see if I can find the lead in on Noburio's DVD's. That was pretty cool.

We out rated the Cricket, BTW, probably why it was pulled.

 

Headcams where initially a pain the the arse (head).

I remember a early one had a hammer head bolted to the other side as a counter weight.

It was about 3kg on your head and another 7kg on your back.

 

And didn't the trapeze wires love it!

 

JB

 

In the Ronstan "Awesome Aussie Skiff" videos, you can see them wearing the backpacks, containing what I could only call a VCR today? A mid 90's VCR is at least 10 lbs (still have one)!

 

JB, now speaking of old skiff videos, do you have any recollection of a 49er match race between what I believe was "Silent Night Beds" (ie, Dan Slater NZL) vs. "Ford" (ie, Nicho AUS) in Auckland Harbour? Would have been mid to late 90's I suppose...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I do know it, may even have a copy of the video.

 

But the Aussie boat (Ford) was sailed by Emmett Lazrich & Ewen McNicol.

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

BTW, got a phone call from one of the old timers, on the ferry.

He apparently has a copy of the original start/finish sheet from the race and that AAMI did it in 48' 54".

I have no proof of that, just one of the guys on the ferry with a recollection and a bit of paper.

 

Nice 20 min chat, he was going to post me a copy, but it has not arrived, and that was over a week ago.

 

It had to be something like that, but what it actually was, I cant say.

 

Jb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Julian - has it turned up yet?

 

Also you mentioned you were going to dig out the Entrad & GF pictures - any joy?

 

Care to chuck in your thoughts on next development that the 18's will take.

I know that the hulls are locked in - and that there were some interesting rig developments going on with masthead forestay with intermediate spreaders - rather like moth style prodders - with in built end plates - I believe the aim was to deflect the forestay into a more vertical orientation for both aero gains and increased area when a top batten made them square topped.

 

Has this proved to be successful? - didn't see any of this in the last JJ's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re Pictures, Im currently sitting in Milan (Malpensa) airport, so sorry, that one escaped my mind, but I'm home in a week, remind me then.

 

I have not been involved at all in the current rigging of the 18teen masts so I am probably totally wrong but the proder fwd is possibly to include some anti-bending characteristics (but it still bends) in/at the base of the upper section while maintaining a reasonable length topmast, so the rig dose not become too wooden.

 

If that is the case then its quite a neat idea in that you still get a topmast of reasonable length so it dose not become too "dead" while also getting the benefits of a higher hounds, and that can be taken up, as a 2nd order effect, with either a square head jib and extra area, or getting a big headed jib's leach fwd so it dose not close/restrict the slot.

 

If you are talking about Jono Whitty's very interesting rig, think that was a great concept that was overly bastardised by sailmakers and coaches who had different boats to row, and it died a natural death.

 

Re the future of 18teens, I'm a purist, so to me a 18teen is a open class.

That class no longer exists, and has been taken over (quite rightly) by weekend warriors, and is no longer the domain of, as Ben Lexan once said, "the hot house flowers of the industry".

 

I guess the 18teens saving grace is nothing has come along to encapsulate that ethos.

 

Sure moths have come close, but one person is never a team, by definition, and humans are tribal (also by definition).

 

You would think that with so much blatant commercialism in the sport these days that something would arise from the ashes, but alas, to many (commercial) forces against it.

 

JB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks JB - yes I was referring to Jono's rig - it just looked super powerful - more area, wing mast, endplates etc.

 

I know that power has to be moderated with useability and be suitable for use in anger, I just don't understand why in a class now restricted by hull and foils - the quest wouldn't switch to the hunt for more horsepower.

 

The use of camber inducers as seen in windsurf and moth rigs, have not surfaced in the 18's either - are they outlawed by a I14 style rule that requires halyard operation?

These style of sails seem to offer good lift to drag characteristics that apparent wind sail boats benefit from.

 

I am guessing that rig development is stymied by the combination of your comment regarding weekend warrior and the need to get boat handling so slick that the current style of package is perceived to not yet having been mastered so completely that development is secondary (and costs nothing - relatively).

 

I will try to remind you in a couple of weeks - Happy Travels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't understand why in a class now restricted by hull and foils - the quest wouldn't switch to the hunt for more horsepower.

 

The use of camber inducers as seen in windsurf and moth rigs, have not surfaced in the 18's either - are they outlawed by a I14 style rule that requires halyard operation?

These style of sails seem to offer good lift to drag characteristics that apparent wind sail boats benefit from.

 

I am guessing that rig development is stymied by the combination of your comment regarding weekend warrior and the need to get boat handling so slick that the current style of package is perceived to not yet having been mastered so completely that development is secondary (and costs nothing - relatively).

 

A few comments.

 

First, there is no rule about halyards. In fact, 18's don't use them at all.

 

Secondly, I would suggest that there has been a huge chase for horsepower. The best way of measuring that is the cross over point between No.1 and No.2 rigs and that seems to have dropped dramatically in the last few years. This has been achieved by a mix of significantly straighter and stiffer rigs combined with significant increases in sail area, which, because of the mast height limit, goes into the head and back of the main. I am not sure if jibs now hoist higher for increased area as well.

 

I think you are taking Julian's weekend warriors comment a bit too literally. What he means is that back in the day, 18's were sailed by full time guys. Today, most only sail at weekends and maybe some mid week trainingg occasionally, but make no mistake, there are still some of the same guys from back in the day, sailing less seriously. Boat handling isn't the issue at the front of the fleet. For me, the big issue is funding - developing new rigs costs a lot of money which isn't in the class these days. & does seem to get the funds to develop rigs, but even then, I suspect it is within certain constraints. Gone are the days when you could stick up a brand new rig every season. There is a limit on the number of new sails you are allowed each year (complex rule depending in regattas sailed but for most, the max is 3).

 

You are therefore taking a huge risk if you try something revolutionary rather than evolutionary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For windsurfing sails, all the major development happened in the late '80s and early '90s. If you take a today's windsurfing rig and one of 20 years ago ('95), the only difference you will notice that is has a little bit more area at the bottom with the mast a little being shorter and thinner. That's it.

 

At that time the Pros had no limitation in amount of equipment, i.e. they came to World Cups with 20 boards and 40 sails. This made boards and sails quicker. The primary goal of the sail cambers was to make the sails more stable in gusts so that the Center of Effort (CoE) does not move backwards. Otherwise in gusts where you need to sheet out the CoE moves with the forward hand pushing and the back hand pulling like crazy. The Pros basically choose sail size to be well powered up in the lulls and camber introducers reduced the control issues in the gusts. A that time, also the square top and dynamic rig was designed. The rigs let off excess power in the gusts which lowered the CoE increasing drive force allowing to go quicker.

After innovative years, recession ended all that. New rules limited the amount of equipment to use. Many people turned over to kitesurfing instead in 2001 or later.

 

For windsurfing-style rigging on sailboats I'm not sure. For bigger sails, the friction between sail and mast might become too high to manage for rigging. Already had 8:1 pulley for downhaul on 7sqm windsurfing sails.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simon - I did not mean to offend anyone about the weekend warrior status - I am fully aware of skill levels involved in the 18's

 

I know that HM carbon rigs are de rigueur in the skiff classes, and that automatic rig action is now driven more by the square headed profile of the mainsail than the tip response of 15 years ago - but I am surprised that wing masts and the like have not emerged, for all the benefits that are potentially on offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..... but I am surprised that wing masts and the like have not emerged, for all the benefits that are potentially on offer.

I agree about the theory. As somebody who has sailed 18's and fast cats, I know the benefits of getting rotation right on wing masts, which makes me believe it should work on an 18. A few years ago (before Jonno tried it) I had conversations with others in the class and I know that one of the all time greats, Trevor Banabus, was totally convincing when he told me that it would work.

 

But as i say, the problem is that if you try it and you get it wrong, it haunts you for maybe 2 seasons because of the limitations on sails. That means you are taking a huge risk, as Jonno showed us. You are stuck with whatever you have for the whole season and then need to replace it for the next season, meaning you cannot replace sails that you might otherwise have changed.

 

Back in thye day of Prime (notice the attempt to bring this back to thread topic :D ) you had the ability to really experiment - if something didn't work, you went back to the workshop. And thank heavens those days happened, because some of the most important development of the last 20+ years came out of those times. We can no longer look to the 18's for that leadership - in fact, even what you are proposing is following, not leading. But that is the price of survival.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In lay-man's terms you use camber inducers when you want more power, or when you want to increase the range of angle that you get effective attachment.

 

In 18teens also in things like AC and X40s you have a jib, the jib dose the same job as say a leading edge flap on a aeroplane on take off or coming into land, it generates a slot, increase the range of AOA that the wing can operate and also increases the ability of the wing to turn the air, so as to get greater lift.

 

An 18teen and same applies for a I14 or a 49er has more than ample surface area so camber-inducers simply would induce lots of drag and you simply cant use the power. So they simply are pointless.

 

Re wanting extra power, it comes at a price which is extra drag, either because of extra surface area, extra weight, extra rigging extra extra extra.

 

That's all well and good if you have the righting moment to capitalise on it.

 

18teen the same as a AC or even a yacht (49er, 29er I14 5o5) all have a defined amount of RM! You cant flick a switch and get more, its defined, so if you want to go fast then you try and reduce the only thing that you have some control over, Drag.

 

So this endless increasing in sail-area has lead to one thing, slower and slower 18teens. (more expensive also, heavier, etc etc)

 

You simply can't argue that, its a given.

 

They are going through their classic saw tooth development, then a Ben Lexan, or a Dave Porter or a Terry McDell or dare I say a Julian Bethwaite will come along with a smaller lower drag package and re-set the register.

 

After a year of quite open and very thorough testing, very open, done completely at arms length, the 49er next May will go from a 31.5sq m spinnaker to a 30 sq m spinnaker and go about 2 knts faster (if you believe all the tests and work).

 

And I am not blowing my own trumpet here, I had nothing to do with the development, Ben Kelly (Quantum) and Ian McDairmid (Pryde) did all this work and its a credit to them both. All I get to do is sign it into being.

 

Thats true development, that's Vestas type extraordinary break through development, do more with less, which is the antithesis of more sail area docrine.

 

JB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK - thanks for that.

 

This has reset my thinking somewhat.

 

I was of the opinion that a wing mast or camber inducers would be good for a really grunty No.1 rig that would get overpowered much sooner than a more conventional No1 rig.

And then a camber induced No.2 rig might be coaxed to have a wider wind range (starting earlier, lower down the wind range) to pick up the difference as it were.

 

I am fully on board with RM being limited.

I was surprised that camber inducers are seen as more "draggy" than the existing bolt rope and mast tube style seen on conventional rigs - this was counter intuitive to my reasoning - and was why I had asked in the first place. (Lots of opportunity for drag inducing vortices and swirls, to form at that junction)

 

Reducing drag was one of the cornerstones that I took away from your dad's book back in the 90's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Continuing on from the whole drag thing, I did some testing as to cross over between No1 and No 2 rig (also called being caught with the wrong rig up!). Upwind, with the No.2 rig in No1 rig conditions was most interesting, because we never felt at a disadvantage. In fact, there were times when we could just about 3 string in, say, 12 knots (we were light) and I believed that we were probably as quick upwind as anybody. With a rooky crew (and past it helm) with no experience of sailing small rig in light conditions, I have always believed that if good enough, the small rig could have been quicker upwind in conditions that you really needed the big rig and that this was due to the lack of drag. The problem comes about once you turn the corner and go downhill. That is when the bigger rig with both larger white and coloured sails simply takes over.

 

So the question to Julian would be, how do you go for a small rig upwind but get the horsepower downhill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that b&W picture looks crazy, I would hope they had some sort of adult dipper you could wear!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should write a book!

 

Simon, down wind you just have to run hotter angles and have a spinnaker that can handle that.

Seen it may times, Iain Murray all gave us a sailing lesson once with a 3rd rig on, on a 2nd rig day.

And we often dropped down early, sure only at 90% often but when you got to 100% RM the boat flew.

Like all things its a compromise.

 

A 16teen #2rig could quite possibly benefit from a cuff luff and camber inducers, but only if you could turn them off, say but pulling a string so that de-cambered them.

 

18teen simply have too much sail area, so a big fat camber inducer in the slot, just is dumb.

 

We saw a dramatic increase in upwind speed with the carbon mast and I put a lot of that down to LE radius of the rig, we went from 70mm OD to 61mm OD and given the RE we are working at, that's possibly the point of diminishing return. Not much point in going any smaller.

29er could come down to 50-55mm OD, and probably will.

 

So its all about the size of the bubble or turbulence right behind the mast on the leeward side.

Windward side there is pressure so the bubble is suppressed.

 

There always will be a bubble to leeward but if you have a jib, and if you get the slot right, then you can dramatically reduce that bubble.

A camber inducer pushes sail into that area with the hope of maintaining flow and therefore no bubble.

 

The difference between moderate bubble and a small bubble is negligible.

This bubble on a 49er is about 100-150mm cord, 20-30mm depth.

 

Above the jib you have twist and increased wind speed, and sometimes you even get a reveres, I do have a great helicopter photo of that and that's when you are really fast.

I'm looking at it now, but will have to de-frame it to scan it in.

And I owe you those other photos, and I'm back home so no excuses.

 

2 Sundays ago I was sailing a Laser in Lansing Harbour (east side of Portsmouth UK), first time in 30 years.

A Sunday latter I was at the top of Lake Garda watching 49ers and FX and even 470's.

Ridiculous to the sublime!

 

Watching these girls take to FX is quite extraordinary, 17 year old India and Singaporean girls just throwing themselves at it. (the Italians won though, for how long, is the question)

Pretty special, these boys and girls, mostly never had known of a skiff ethic and now they are fully embracing it.

 

Maybe they will be the drivers of the next explosion in 18teens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly not the photos you want to see but!

 

The Hydralic vang on GF pretty clear in this shot at the base of the mast.

In the next shot, you can see the nappy around the carbon boom, red rope is the spin bag opener, and you can just see the top of the hydraulic beneath the jib track block.

(Entrad had the whole vang system in the boom)

Dispensed with fore-stay hydraulic by then, just too complicated.

 

3rd rig, also you can just see the bow drop board that was deployed down wind with the #1 and #2 rigs before we shortened the pole.

 

That's a very young me in the bow, Matty Coleman on sheet and you can see just a bit of Rob Browns head infront of the luff.

 

 

post-26198-0-57308000-1431899943_thumb.jpg

post-26198-0-53181400-1431899985_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whole lot of history surrounding this photo, but wont go into that,

Shows the top of the sail reversing, and at the time we are going past other 18teen, up wind, like they where standing still. Probably 16-17knts boats speed.

17tft wings, very simply, very fast.

 

Pretty sure its early 1992, Charlie (Mack) Diekman in the bow, Camron (Mall) McDonald on sheet, coming into Bardely's head in a stiff ENE-er.

post-26198-0-05220700-1431900941_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I follow the argument against camber inducers on an 18 main, but I don't understand the difference between camber inducers and a wing mast. Why would one be bad and the other good?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cross wind, almost no difference, both will increase power to the point where a Tasar, A class, and boats of that ilk do not need a spinnaker to get quite extraordinary performance.

 

Up-wind, wing mast and camber inducers will not increase power, effectively, and camber inducers will increase drag.

 

A well rotated wing mast will reduce drag.

 

So the difference is camber inducers increase drag.

Wing mast reduces drag.

 

Assuming a round mast is the constant!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I follow the argument against camber inducers on an 18 main, but I don't understand the difference between camber inducers and a wing mast. Why would one be bad and the other good?

 

Think about the differences: a sophisticated wing mast* has a leading edge that will promote clean flow separation, compared to a round tube, with or without camber inducers. Camber inducers make for a clean transition from mast to sail on the lee side, but don't do anything about the separation, and also change stuff about the flow on the windward side.

 

Julian, some years ago I heard that you'd suggested that a non structural leading edge fairing would be an interesting avenue of exploration, which makes sense to me.

 

It occurs to me that the combination of such a fairing with camber inducers and clever design might well result in a setup that would approximate in aero shape to the sort of vaguely diamond shape profile that I understand NS14s seem to use these days, but retain the dynamic properties of a tube mast, which seem to me better than classic wing masts where it seems to me that the bend characteristics in some respects battle with desirable dynamic response. Any thoughts on that?

 

 

*as opposed to a pear shaped section with the blunt end forward, which never seems to deliver any great benefit in practice on a dinghy platform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bora did it, Don't think he did it right and he discarded it, we (Bora and I) have had a conversation about that, but ask him.

 

Think a Moth the LE rad is coming down past a point of diminishing return, so possibly not the right boat to do it on anyway.

 

JB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

[…]

 

I am guessing that rig development is stymied by the combination of your comment regarding weekend warrior and the need to get boat handling so slick that the current style of package is perceived to not yet having been mastered so completely that development is secondary (and costs nothing - relatively).

 

[…]

I think you are taking Julian's weekend warriors comment a bit too literally. What he means is that back in the day, 18's were sailed by full time guys. Today, most only sail at weekends and maybe some mid week trainingg occasionally, but make no mistake, there are still some of the same guys from back in the day, sailing less seriously.

[…]

 

My understanding of the rules is that the crew must be amateurs, at least in regard to 18s:

 

8) CREW

a ) There shall be a minimum crew of three (3).

b ) The minimum age of any crew member shall be 14 years.

c ) A boats crew shall include a maximum of two group 3 sailors as classified under the ISAF Classification Code, provided that the work undertaken or pay received by that group 3 sailor shall not have related in any way to 18foot skiffs.

d ) Dispensation for rule 8c) may be granted by the National Committee

Noting that many of them are world champions and top performers in other classes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how come they put a Magic 25 rig on a Skiff?

lol

I think you have that the wrong way around. They put an 18' skiff rig on the Magic 25, which is not surprising seeing that skiff legend Iain Murray designed it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's the difference in efficiency between reefing (or using a smaller rig) and blading out the top of the main? As I understand it, aligning the head of the sail with the AWA eliminates the upwash that means no tip wortex.

I'm wondering why the Moths aren't using smaller rigs in high winds if it has lower drag.

 

18teen the same as a AC or even a yacht (49er, 29er I14 5o5) all have a defined amount of RM! You cant flick a switch and get more, its defined, so if you want to go fast then you try and reduce the only thing that you have some control over, Drag.

 

So this endless increasing in sail-area has lead to one thing, slower and slower 18teens. (more expensive also, heavier, etc etc)

 

You simply can't argue that, its a given.

 

They are going through their classic saw tooth development, then a Ben Lexan, or a Dave Porter or a Terry McDell or dare I say a Julian Bethwaite will come along with a smaller lower drag package and re-set the register.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites