Tornado-Cat

The winning foils

Recommended Posts

Weta confirmed in the NZ thread that these are the original foils. He later deleted that post, although (him being cagey on the subject) not necessarily because it was incorrect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't know if this TNZ foil (no1?) is fast, but it's surely stable, much more than GTF one.

So, if TNZ foils are stable, where is the extra generated power going ?

The stability the boat exhibits could be the result of use of hydro, not just foil shape.

The wing also has shown more trim movements that the other boats which must use a lot of power.

I'm not sure this is the foil they launched with, although it has the distinctive dihedral I didn't notice the very long wingspan, albeit the latest vids are a bit shakey to really zoom in.

 

More stable foil, may allow them to use more energy on the wing control, and, yes, they must have pretty good valves too :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TC, what makes you think they are 'more stable' than other foils?

I did wonder that myself. Wasn't going to bait him😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weta confirmed in the NZ thread that these are the original foils. He later deleted that post, although (him being cagey on the subject) not necessarily because it was incorrect.

Whilst they may be the original foils they do look remarkably different at the elbow from what we saw in nz IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TC, what makes you think they are 'more stable' than other foils?

The V (of the tip) is generally more (auto) stable than flat or slightly curved designs as others have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

TC, what makes you think they are 'more stable' than other foils?

I did wonder that myself. Wasn't going to bait him😉
Part 2 of Jason's video from yesterday shows ETNZ struggling a bit in their turns, first time out with them in months. If there's a trade off between stable and aggressive, well I'd tend toward a guess on the latter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DL is just hearing out of Holroyd what he wants to think Holroyd meant.

 

Wrong: I specifically referenced what Holroyd said exactly, as well as referencing the animation he used to illustrate how cant can improve heave stability-- several times with an exact quote-no interpretation needed and exactly what I have said for months. Surprised you would make such an inaccurate statement.

 

 

 

**Nick Holroyd 3:38 in-see video above along with foil animation and the quote below:

"Secondary axis of cant we can use to modify the orientation of the board in a way that ,perhaps, gives us ,more or less stability. From a mode that is unstable but fast to a more stable but easier to sail kind of mode"

modify the orientation of the board= to reconfigure the board

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

TC, what makes you think they are 'more stable' than other foils?

The V (of the tip) is generally more (auto) stable than flat or slightly curved designs as others have.

 

The first time I saw TNZ foil I thought they had succeded to make a different kind of foil, their flat V working like an uptip with less drag and auto heave stability.

If their new racing foils are like others, then it means that it was not a good concept, if not, well....., w'll know very soon.

BTW, which team did TNZ beat in the practice race, BAR, that is not a surprise, and the others ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I don't mind being wrong-or right. Right or wrong at the end of this Cup I will have learned something. Will you and the "believers" be able to say the same thing?

The situation with the light and heavy air foils is a case in point. You want us to believe that every team is telling us lies, that they are not using a 2 foil design strategy. It makes zero sense. Each team gets close enough to the opposition to see what foils they are using and know enough (= more than you) to be able to assess the foils they see. none of them would fall for the lies you suggest are being told. There is no point at all of anybody saying they have light and heavy wind foils if they don't. Yet you simply refuse to accept the clear evidence.

 

 

 

 

This is the Americas Cup and you are defending believing what the teams say about the single most wide open elements of this Cup. That is just silly! You're way off base if you think you can believe a single word any team says about its foils!! Especially NOW- when racing in anger hasn't even begun. But you go ahead fantasize away.......

 

As usual, you avoid the substantive discussion and focus on something which isn't that relevant. You simply fail to understand the risks involved with using either a single type general foil or a 2 type foil strategy. If you really understood it, there is no way you would try to defend a 1 foil strategy.

 

In every type of foiler, it has been found that while most foils will cover a very wide wind/speed range, foils designed specifically for a smaller range have always been faster than those that are for general wider use. A foil designed for early take off will never perform with the same top speed as a specialist foil designed for higher speeds. Anybody who believes that a single foil design can be the fastest in all conditions really doesn't have a clue.

 

So most of the time, you are going to be better off with specialist foils designed for the conditions. There are 2 occasions when this might not be so. The first is in crossover conditions, because it all depends on what compromises have been made in this regard. The other is when the conditions are long way out from the forecast. In the first case, you need to assume that the general foil design is better in the crossover range than the condition specific foils, but that would suggest the general foil will be even more compromised at either end of the scale. In the case of the wrong forecast, that really is a very rare event these days and means that the models haven't perfomed properly. Now, there are only a limited number of models and a limited number of data sources and the chances are all the teams will be running models of all the data services and in addition to their own models, if they even bother with them, they will run multiple models. The point is, everybody will effectively have very much the same data to base decidions on, and it will be a very rare occurrence for teams to have widely different views on the weather. This being so, it is going to be very rare that you get caught on the wrong foils and that the other team don't.

 

All I know is that in the classes I have sailed which have allowed light and heavy wind gear, it is only occasionally you get the choice wrong and are uncompetitive because of it. I believe that for the AC teams, you are looking at a situation that happens less than, say 1 in 10. If it is 1 in 10, that means in the 9 other situations, you would be better off on specialist foils. For generalist foils to be a better bet, you need to odds of a team being caught on the wrong foils to be better than 50/50 and there is no way that will happen.

 

The only other time a 1 design strategy could be an advantage is in the case of a foil breakage during the event. Besides the fact they are now allowed more spares, relying on another team breaking a foil is a very high risk strategy. You have to assume some of the teams will get through the series without a breakage.

 

As for what the teams are saying, in my experience, teams simply say nothing rather than lie about this sort of thing, because they can look pretty stupid pretty quickly. None of the teams are blind or stupid. Nobody is going to fall for a "we are trying to kid you we are using 2 different foils when we are only using one" line when the evidence is to the contrary and there is no way every team would be trying exactly the same head game. It's also so late in the game that there is no point trying to fake it because everybody knows that every team is committed to whatever strategy they have. I believe every boat launched with one of their sets of AC50 foils, so from that moment they were committed to either a 1 or 2 board strategy and everything we have seen says they are using more than one design.

 

Face it, Doug. Basic risk analysis tells us that teams shouldn't go with an all round foil design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fischer talked about how he copied ETNZ AC34 Design for the GC32. How the fuck is that relevant to this cup! It's not.

Oh Doug. Why do you have this compulsion to be the only one who knows something? Gawd!

It works in all wind ranges because of the Up your butt tip!

So fucken what!!!!!!

It's not optimal, it's not relevant!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

G'day Guy's

 

I have a question - Why do these boats sail so bow down?

 

Bas

It's bow down and heeled to windward. It's all to do with optimising airflow over the deck areas and how the deck/wing interface works. It improves the end plate effect and reduces drag off the bottom of the wing by helping to organise the airflow. A by product is that reduces the chance of leeward heel which loads up the leeward foil adding to drag and making foiling harder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

G'day Guy's

 

I have a question - Why do these boats sail so bow down?

 

Bas

I think its due to the fact that the rudder is restricted to 5 degres change in rake therefore only 5 degrees change in AoA on the rudder wings which is not enough to componsate for the change in vertical load on the rudder between upwind and down wind due to the change in force vectors on the wing sail.

The change in trim of the plateform increase the possible AoA range on the rudders! Have not done any calculations so could be talking hot air.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

G'day Guy's

 

I have a question - Why do these boats sail so bow down?

 

Bas

It's bow down and heeled to windward. It's all to do with optimising airflow over the deck areas and how the deck/wing interface works. It improves the end plate effect and reduces drag off the bottom of the wing by helping to organise the airflow. A by product is that reduces the chance of leeward heel which loads up the leeward foil adding to drag and making foiling harder.

 

Good answer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

G'day Guy's

 

I have a question - Why do these boats sail so bow down?

 

Bas

I think its due to the fact that the rudder is restricted to 5 degres change in rake therefore only 5 degrees change in AoA on the rudder wings which is not enough to componsate for the change in vertical load on the rudder between upwind and down wind due to the change in force vectors on the wing sail.

The change in trim of the plateform increase the possible AoA range on the rudders! Have not done any calculations so could be talking hot air.

 

 

3 degrees not 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

DL is just hearing out of Holroyd what he wants to think Holroyd meant.

 

Wrong: I specifically referenced what Holroyd said exactly, as well as referencing the animation he used to illustrate how cant can improve heave stability-- several times with an exact quote-no interpretation needed and exactly what I have said for months. Surprised you would make such an inaccurate statement.

 

 

 

**Nick Holroyd 3:38 in-see video above along with foil animation and the quote below:

"Secondary axis of cant we can use to modify the orientation of the board in a way that ,perhaps, gives us ,more or less stability. From a mode that is unstable but fast to a more stable but easier to sail kind of mode"

modify the orientation of the board= to reconfigure the board

 

 

^ A very disingenuous post....

 

You added windspeed range and 'reconfigure' to about your next 20 posts, distorting his statements and trying to swing his discussion and diagrams of something they are not doing to suit your own agenda.

 

You also continue to deny the obvious (and clearly implied) "cant = more stable = slow!"

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weta confirmed in the NZ thread that these are the original foils. He later deleted that post, although (him being cagey on the subject) not necessarily because it was incorrect.

 

I haven't deleted any posts??

 

Edit: It was on the Practice Videos thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

DL is just hearing out of Holroyd what he wants to think Holroyd meant.

 

Wrong: I specifically referenced what Holroyd said exactly, as well as referencing the animation he used to illustrate how cant can improve heave stability-- several times with an exact quote-no interpretation needed and exactly what I have said for months. Surprised you would make such an inaccurate statement.

 

 

 

**Nick Holroyd 3:38 in-see video above along with foil animation and the quote below:

"Secondary axis of cant we can use to modify the orientation of the board in a way that ,perhaps, gives us ,more or less stability. From a mode that is unstable but fast to a more stable but easier to sail kind of mode"

modify the orientation of the board= to reconfigure the board

 

What really surprises me is why haven't you been approached by any team...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

DL is just hearing out of Holroyd what he wants to think Holroyd meant.

 

Wrong: I specifically referenced what Holroyd said exactly, as well as referencing the animation he used to illustrate how cant can improve heave stability-- several times with an exact quote-no interpretation needed and exactly what I have said for months. Surprised you would make such an inaccurate statement.

 

 

 

**Nick Holroyd 3:38 in-see video above along with foil animation and the quote below:

"Secondary axis of cant we can use to modify the orientation of the board in a way that ,perhaps, gives us ,more or less stability. From a mode that is unstable but fast to a more stable but easier to sail kind of mode"

modify the orientation of the board= to reconfigure the board

 

 

^ A very disingenuous post....

 

You added windspeed range and 'reconfigure' to about your next 20 posts, distorting his statements and trying to swing his discussion and diagrams of something they are not doing to suit your own agenda.

 

You also continue to deny the obvious (and clearly implied) "cant = more stable = slow!"

 

 

 

 

Your comment is just bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I don't mind being wrong-or right. Right or wrong at the end of this Cup I will have learned something. Will you and the "believers" be able to say the same thing?

The situation with the light and heavy air foils is a case in point. You want us to believe that every team is telling us lies, that they are not using a 2 foil design strategy. It makes zero sense. Each team gets close enough to the opposition to see what foils they are using and know enough (= more than you) to be able to assess the foils they see. none of them would fall for the lies you suggest are being told. There is no point at all of anybody saying they have light and heavy wind foils if they don't. Yet you simply refuse to accept the clear evidence.

 

 

 

 

This is the Americas Cup and you are defending believing what the teams say about the single most wide open elements of this Cup. That is just silly! You're way off base if you think you can believe a single word any team says about its foils!! Especially NOW- when racing in anger hasn't even begun. But you go ahead fantasize away.......

 

As usual, you avoid the substantive discussion and focus on something which isn't that relevant. You simply fail to understand the risks involved with using either a single type general foil or a 2 type foil strategy. If you really understood it, there is no way you would try to defend a 1 foil strategy. You're dead wrong!

 

In every type of foiler, it has been found that while most foils will cover a very wide wind/speed range, foils designed specifically for a smaller range have always been faster than those that are for general wider use. A foil designed for early take off will never perform with the same top speed as a specialist foil designed for higher speeds. Anybody who believes that a single foil design can be the fastest in all conditions really doesn't have a clue. What you don't get is that there have never been foilers like these AC 50's. The extremely fast and accurate control systems and huge advances in foil design would allow a foil designed for the legal windrange to work extraordinarily well. Cant can be used to reconfigure a foil at will -multiple times as necessary. The HUGE gamble of splitting a limited number of foils into two mutually exclusive groups seems like a very scary way to go IF you want to win the Cup.

And if any Team was working on this they sure as hell wouldn't be telling you!

 

 

Face it, Doug. Basic risk analysis tells us that teams shouldn't go with an all round foil design. I'm convinced you are very wrong.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The HUGE gamble of splitting a limited number of foils into two mutually exclusive groups seems like a very scary way to go IF you want to win the Cup.

 

Please explain why it is a huge gamble by being specific as to when having 2 groups of foils will lose out. You cannot just say it is huge gamble without justifying your comment, although it seems like you believe you can make sweeping statements without anything to back them up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, Doug. A side track, but totally related - if you can expand your mind a little. Why do jets have wing flaps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest reason that light air and heavy air specialist foils are likely to be wrong is the high probability of the conditions changing during a race day! A specialist foil won't allow the Team to reconfigure the foil for changes in conditions. A foil specifically designed to be able to function like an optimized foil in any condition will allow the Team to be fast regardless of the conditions. Otherwise, it's a huge gamble if you pick one of two different foils for a race day, either one of which could wind up being dead wrong when conditions change in the middle of the days racing. I'm convinced the technology exists to design a foil that will be capable of being configured(using cant, rake, rudder rake and other adjustments to the boat and wing) to work as well as a "traditionally" optimized foil would. Assuming such a foil is possible, the foil allotment for that team is effectively doubled, reducing the chance of disaster due to any cause and giving that Team a very comfortable margin compared to the Teams with half as many viable foils.

This would be a major breakthru with these boats and a state secret with any Team doing the development required to make this work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest reason that light air and heavy air specialist foils are likely to be wrong is the high probability of the conditions changing during a race day! A specialist foil won't allow the Team to reconfigure the foil for changes in conditions. A foil specifically designed to be able to function like an optimized foil in any condition will allow the Team to be fast regardless of the conditions. Otherwise, it's a huge gamble if you pick one of two different foils for a race day, either one of which could wind up being dead wrong when conditions change in the middle of the days racing. I'm convinced the technology exists to design a foil that will be capable of being configured(using cant, rake, rudder rake and other adjustments to the boat and wing) to work as well as a "traditionally" optimized foil would. Assuming such a foil is possible, the foil allotment for that team is effectively doubled, reducing the chance of disaster due to any cause and giving that Team a very comfortable margin compared to the Teams with half as many viable foils.

This would be a major breakthru with these boats and a state secret with any Team doing the development required to make this work.

 

Would you at least concede that having 2 x sets of foils optimised (different cambers and span lengths and shapes) for different wind ranges, BOTH being "capable of being configured (using cant, rake, rudder rake and other adjustments to the boat and wing", would be advantageous, Doug?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^

Don't be so stupid SBD! Doug Lord don't admit nothing fo sho!

Doug Lord pity the fool that disagrees with Doug Lord!

 

But seriously, Doug is so utterly stubborn, I almost admire him for it.

He could of course be 100% correct and all the teams are just bullshitting us.

 

But I suspect that the chances of this are roughly the same as L.Ron Hubbard being correct and Lord Xenu (is that Doug Lord Xenu? :D ) returning to Earth to collect up all the thetans he left here last time!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest reason that light air and heavy air specialist foils are likely to be wrong is the high probability of the conditions changing during a race day!

This really does show where you are going wrong. Even at the level I have raced at, the forecasts we used were accurate enough that it was very, very rare that you ever got caught out with wrong gear or settings due to the forecast being wrong. If you analyse the conditions in Bermuda, it is also very rare that conditions change dramatically and unpredictably, never mind over the short period of tie the racing is scheduled to take place.

 

Forecasting these days is getting far better than most realise. If you rely on the Weather Channel, you might well get caught out, but when using the best forecasting services, it is very rare. When in regatta mode, I use 4 different forecast services, 3 free and 1 paid. The paid service and one of the free ones do multiple forecasts based on different base data sets that are available to all. One of them runs a number of different models on those so they end up with 4 different forecasts. As an aside, one of these services is the commercialisation of the weather prediction services developed by Team NZ. If you know what you are doing,by comparing the results of all of these you end up with a very high degree of confidence of what the conditions will be. I am pretty sure that each AC team has even better tools at their disposal, because not only can they get all the services available, but they probably have developed their own proprietary tools and they have their own observed data to refer to.

 

You are basing your whole foil strategy on the very rare times when you might get caught out by the conditions. Looking at available data and reading comments from various experts, i would say that the chances of getting caught with the wrong forecast and the wrong foils is less than 1 in 10, but let's halve that and say it is 1 in 5. That means that in 4 out of 5 races, if you have foils designed for specific conditions, you will be better off than with general foils while a boat with general foils would be better off 1 time in 5. To even be neutral between a 2 foil and a 1 foil strategy, you would need it to be likely that you would choose the wrong gear in half the races. That just isn't going to happen.

 

Doug, are you telling us that the conditions in Bermuda are far less predictable than anywhere else or that the teams don't have decent weather prediction abilities, because that is the only way your assertion makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

G'day Guy's

 

I have a question - Why do these boats sail so bow down?

 

Bas

I think its due to the fact that the rudder is restricted to 5 degres change in rake therefore only 5 degrees change in AoA on the rudder wings which is not enough to componsate for the change in vertical load on the rudder between upwind and down wind due to the change in force vectors on the wing sail.

The change in trim of the plateform increase the possible AoA range on the rudders! Have not done any calculations so could be talking hot air.

 

Here's an article that supports the limit on rudder rake being a primary reason for sailing bow down (at least when sailing downwind), including a video explanation by Tom Slingsby: http://www.sail-world.com/153214

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DL is likely reinforcing his fantasy that he needs to build just one pair of foils for his next RC boat. Which would be fine if we didn't have to hear about it endlessly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The biggest reason that light air and heavy air specialist foils are likely to be wrong is the high probability of the conditions changing during a race day!

This really does show where you are going wrong. Even at the level I have raced at, the forecasts we used were accurate enough that it was very, very rare that you ever got caught out with wrong gear or settings due to the forecast being wrong. If you analyse the conditions in Bermuda, it is also very rare that conditions change dramatically and unpredictably, never mind over the short period of tie the racing is scheduled to take place.

 

Forecasting these days is getting far better than most realise. If you rely on the Weather Channel, you might well get caught out, but when using the best forecasting services, it is very rare. When in regatta mode, I use 4 different forecast services, 3 free and 1 paid. The paid service and one of the free ones do multiple forecasts based on different base data sets that are available to all. One of them runs a number of different models on those so they end up with 4 different forecasts. As an aside, one of these services is the commercialisation of the weather prediction services developed by Team NZ. If you know what you are doing,by comparing the results of all of these you end up with a very high degree of confidence of what the conditions will be. I am pretty sure that each AC team has even better tools at their disposal, because not only can they get all the services available, but they probably have developed their own proprietary tools and they have their own observed data to refer to.

 

You are basing your whole foil strategy on the very rare times when you might get caught out by the conditions. Looking at available data and reading comments from various experts, i would say that the chances of getting caught with the wrong forecast and the wrong foils is less than 1 in 10, but let's halve that and say it is 1 in 5. That means that in 4 out of 5 races, if you have foils designed for specific conditions, you will be better off than with general foils while a boat with general foils would be better off 1 time in 5. To even be neutral between a 2 foil and a 1 foil strategy, you would need it to be likely that you would choose the wrong gear in half the races. That just isn't going to happen.

 

Doug, are you telling us that the conditions in Bermuda are far less predictable than anywhere else or that the teams don't have decent weather prediction abilities, because that is the only way your assertion makes sense.

 

 

You either didn't read my whole post or didn't understand it. Too bad.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Team_GBR, do you think BAR has 2 sets of foils with interchangeable shafts ? that means that for the case they break one set, BAR could transform the other either in light or strong wind foil, just by changing the tip ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doug you continue to piss off so many people with your theories and comments that one day you might look in the mirror and realise what all the fuss is about? Could it be you or are the rest of us stark raving mad?

post-5312-0-23748500-1493602183_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The biggest reason that light air and heavy air specialist foils are likely to be wrong is the high probability of the conditions changing during a race day!

This really does show where you are going wrong. Even at the level I have raced at, the forecasts we used were accurate enough that it was very, very rare that you ever got caught out with wrong gear or settings due to the forecast being wrong. If you analyse the conditions in Bermuda, it is also very rare that conditions change dramatically and unpredictably, never mind over the short period of tie the racing is scheduled to take place.

 

Forecasting these days is getting far better than most realise. If you rely on the Weather Channel, you might well get caught out, but when using the best forecasting services, it is very rare. When in regatta mode, I use 4 different forecast services, 3 free and 1 paid. The paid service and one of the free ones do multiple forecasts based on different base data sets that are available to all. One of them runs a number of different models on those so they end up with 4 different forecasts. As an aside, one of these services is the commercialisation of the weather prediction services developed by Team NZ. If you know what you are doing,by comparing the results of all of these you end up with a very high degree of confidence of what the conditions will be. I am pretty sure that each AC team has even better tools at their disposal, because not only can they get all the services available, but they probably have developed their own proprietary tools and they have their own observed data to refer to.

 

You are basing your whole foil strategy on the very rare times when you might get caught out by the conditions. Looking at available data and reading comments from various experts, i would say that the chances of getting caught with the wrong forecast and the wrong foils is less than 1 in 10, but let's halve that and say it is 1 in 5. That means that in 4 out of 5 races, if you have foils designed for specific conditions, you will be better off than with general foils while a boat with general foils would be better off 1 time in 5. To even be neutral between a 2 foil and a 1 foil strategy, you would need it to be likely that you would choose the wrong gear in half the races. That just isn't going to happen.

 

Doug, are you telling us that the conditions in Bermuda are far less predictable than anywhere else or that the teams don't have decent weather prediction abilities, because that is the only way your assertion makes sense.

 

 

Ha, ha. Accurate forecasts these days? Pfft!

 

Last time I sailed on Wellington Harbour in a Nor'easter, the Marine Forecast predicted a Southerly change - a front coming through at 12:00 mid-day, with gale force winds. (Not unusual for Wellington).

 

They were wrong of course. It came through at 12:07!

 

We still managed to fuck it up completely, but that's another story. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The biggest reason that light air and heavy air specialist foils are likely to be wrong is the high probability of the conditions changing during a race day!

This really does show where you are going wrong. Even at the level I have raced at, the forecasts we used were accurate enough that it was very, very rare that you ever got caught out with wrong gear or settings due to the forecast being wrong. If you analyse the conditions in Bermuda, it is also very rare that conditions change dramatically and unpredictably, never mind over the short period of tie the racing is scheduled to take place.

 

Forecasting these days is getting far better than most realise. If you rely on the Weather Channel, you might well get caught out, but when using the best forecasting services, it is very rare. When in regatta mode, I use 4 different forecast services, 3 free and 1 paid. The paid service and one of the free ones do multiple forecasts based on different base data sets that are available to all. One of them runs a number of different models on those so they end up with 4 different forecasts. As an aside, one of these services is the commercialisation of the weather prediction services developed by Team NZ. If you know what you are doing,by comparing the results of all of these you end up with a very high degree of confidence of what the conditions will be. I am pretty sure that each AC team has even better tools at their disposal, because not only can they get all the services available, but they probably have developed their own proprietary tools and they have their own observed data to refer to.

 

You are basing your whole foil strategy on the very rare times when you might get caught out by the conditions. Looking at available data and reading comments from various experts, i would say that the chances of getting caught with the wrong forecast and the wrong foils is less than 1 in 10, but let's halve that and say it is 1 in 5. That means that in 4 out of 5 races, if you have foils designed for specific conditions, you will be better off than with general foils while a boat with general foils would be better off 1 time in 5. To even be neutral between a 2 foil and a 1 foil strategy, you would need it to be likely that you would choose the wrong gear in half the races. That just isn't going to happen.

 

Doug, are you telling us that the conditions in Bermuda are far less predictable than anywhere else or that the teams don't have decent weather prediction abilities, because that is the only way your assertion makes sense.

 

 

You either didn't read my whole post or didn't understand it. Too bad.......

 

Typical and predictable. I did read the whole post and responded to what you said was "the biggest reason". Once you debunk "the biggest reason", the rest becomes less relevant. Everything else you say is based on your personal belief that you can build general foils that will work as well (be as fast) as specialist foils across the whole range. There is no evidence at all that this is possible. Showing us the GS32 is meaningless because all it proves is that one foil can work across a range but it provides zero evidence that it is the optimum across the range. Moth foils all work across the range, but I know that some are better in specific conditions than others. You also keep using Holroyd"s quote ""Secondary axis of cant we can use to modify the orientation of the board in a way that ,perhaps, gives us ,more or less stability. From a mode that is unstable but fast to a more stable but easier to sail kind of mode" but nowhere does he say that this allows foils to be made for the whole range of conditions. Even with a 2 foils strategy, there is still significant need to adjust the foils over the (narrower) range of conditions for which they are designed.

 

So rather than your standard "you don't understand" comment you use whenever your arguments are subjected to proper analysis, how about you come back with both specific analysis of where the risks of a 2 foil strategy are and also with any specific evidence that teams are using a one design of foil strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

The biggest reason that light air and heavy air specialist foils are likely to be wrong is the high probability of the conditions changing during a race day!

 

This really does show where you are going wrong. Even at the level I have raced at, the forecasts we used were accurate enough that it was very, very rare that you ever got caught out with wrong gear or settings due to the forecast being wrong. If you analyse the conditions in Bermuda, it is also very rare that conditions change dramatically and unpredictably, never mind over the short period of tie the racing is scheduled to take place.

 

Forecasting these days is getting far better than most realise. If you rely on the Weather Channel, you might well get caught out, but when using the best forecasting services, it is very rare. When in regatta mode, I use 4 different forecast services, 3 free and 1 paid. The paid service and one of the free ones do multiple forecasts based on different base data sets that are available to all. One of them runs a number of different models on those so they end up with 4 different forecasts. As an aside, one of these services is the commercialisation of the weather prediction services developed by Team NZ. If you know what you are doing,by comparing the results of all of these you end up with a very high degree of confidence of what the conditions will be. I am pretty sure that each AC team has even better tools at their disposal, because not only can they get all the services available, but they probably have developed their own proprietary tools and they have their own observed data to refer to.

 

You are basing your whole foil strategy on the very rare times when you might get caught out by the conditions. Looking at available data and reading comments from various experts, i would say that the chances of getting caught with the wrong forecast and the wrong foils is less than 1 in 10, but let's halve that and say it is 1 in 5. That means that in 4 out of 5 races, if you have foils designed for specific conditions, you will be better off than with general foils while a boat with general foils would be better off 1 time in 5. To even be neutral between a 2 foil and a 1 foil strategy, you would need it to be likely that you would choose the wrong gear in half the races. That just isn't going to happen.

 

Doug, are you telling us that the conditions in Bermuda are far less predictable than anywhere else or that the teams don't have decent weather prediction abilities, because that is the only way your assertion makes sense.

You either didn't read my whole post or didn't understand it. Too bad.......

Typical and predictable. I did read the whole post and responded to what you said was "the biggest reason". Once you debunk "the biggest reason", the rest becomes less relevant. Everything else you say is based on your personal belief that you can build general foils that will work as well (be as fast) as specialist foils across the whole range. There is no evidence at all that this is possible. Showing us the GS32 is meaningless because all it proves is that one foil can work across a range but it provides zero evidence that it is the optimum across the range. Moth foils all work across the range, but I know that some are better in specific conditions than others. You also keep using Holroyd"s quote ""Secondary axis of cant we can use to modify the orientation of the board in a way that ,perhaps, gives us ,more or less stability. From a mode that is unstable but fast to a more stable but easier to sail kind of mode" but nowhere does he say that this allows foils to be made for the whole range of conditions. Even with a 2 foils strategy, there is still significant need to adjust the foils over the (narrower) range of conditions for which they are designed.

 

So rather than your standard "you don't understand" comment you use whenever your arguments are subjected to proper analysis, how about you come back with both specific analysis of where the risks of a 2 foil strategy are and also with any specific evidence that teams are using a one design of foil strategy.

If you pin him in a corner he will just pretend not to have seen you post , it's been his MO even from his RC days .

 

I asked him a simple one a few days ago , very clear and concise , and as expected he just slid on by .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^

Don't be so stupid SBD! Doug Lord don't admit nothing fo sho!

Doug Lord pity the fool that disagrees with Doug Lord!

 

But seriously, Doug is so utterly stubborn, I almost admire him for it.

He could of course be 100% correct and all the teams are just bullshitting us.

 

But I suspect that the chances of this are roughly the same as L.Ron Hubbard being correct and Lord Xenu (is that Doug Lord Xenu? :D ) returning to Earth to collect up all the thetans he left here last time!

 

Lord, lord lord. He da busta fosho. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FFS, why don't you fuckers just ease off on Doug Lord?? Disagree with his opinions by all means, but the lynch-mob mentality is ugly!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FFS, why don't you fuckers just ease off on Doug Lord?? Disagree with his opinions by all means, but the lynch-mob mentality is ugly!!

+ 1000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FFS, why don't you fuckers just ease off on Doug Lord?? Disagree with his opinions by all means, but the lynch-mob mentality is ugly!!

+1

it's like a petty bunch of school kids laying into someone with more brains. Sure, he might or might not be wrong, but there are a few here who have joined in on the pile on that don't have a fricken clue about foils/tech who have just joined in. And yes some of the prolific kiwi contributers, here's looking at you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly he doesn't deserve your sympathy, not when he carries on like this, twisting other peoples work to bolster his latest against-all-the-evidence claim - and then lying about it.

 

 

 

 

 

DL is just hearing out of Holroyd what he wants to think Holroyd meant.

 

Wrong: I specifically referenced what Holroyd said exactly, as well as referencing the animation he used to illustrate how cant can improve heave stability-- several times with an exact quote-no interpretation needed and exactly what I have said for months. Surprised you would make such an inaccurate statement.

 

 

 

**Nick Holroyd 3:38 in-see video above along with foil animation and the quote below:

"Secondary axis of cant we can use to modify the orientation of the board in a way that ,perhaps, gives us ,more or less stability. From a mode that is unstable but fast to a more stable but easier to sail kind of mode"

modify the orientation of the board= to reconfigure the board

 

 

^ A very disingenuous post....

 

You added windspeed range and 'reconfigure' to about your next 20 posts, distorting his statements and trying to swing his discussion and diagrams of something they are not doing to suit your own agenda.

 

You also continue to deny the obvious (and clearly implied) "cant = more stable = slow!"

 

 

 

 

Your comment is just bullshit.

 

 

 

DL - Either produce the wonder foil - or accept the current state of play

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly he doesn't deserve your sympathy, not when he carries on like this, twisting other peoples work to bolster his latest against-all-the-evidence claim - and then lying about it.

 

 

 

 

 

DL is just hearing out of Holroyd what he wants to think Holroyd meant.

 

Wrong: I specifically referenced what Holroyd said exactly, as well as referencing the animation he used to illustrate how cant can improve heave stability-- several times with an exact quote-no interpretation needed and exactly what I have said for months. Surprised you would make such an inaccurate statement.

 

 

 

**Nick Holroyd 3:38 in-see video above along with foil animation and the quote below:

"Secondary axis of cant we can use to modify the orientation of the board in a way that ,perhaps, gives us ,more or less stability. From a mode that is unstable but fast to a more stable but easier to sail kind of mode"

modify the orientation of the board= to reconfigure the board

 

 

^ A very disingenuous post....

 

You added windspeed range and 'reconfigure' to about your next 20 posts, distorting his statements and trying to swing his discussion and diagrams of something they are not doing to suit your own agenda.

 

You also continue to deny the obvious (and clearly implied) "cant = more stable = slow!"

 

 

 

 

Your comment is just bullshit.

 

 

 

DL - Either produce the wonder foil - or accept the current state of play

 

Your other "comments" about this have been 100% bullshit, but this is just an incredibly stupid thing to say!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So airliners deploy massive flaps for landing but fully retract for cruising speed.

Motorsport of most flavours and types have different tyres for wet, intermediate and dry, soft, ultra soft etc.

Open wheelers have different front and rear wings depending on whether they are running high speed ovals or tracks.

F1 runs highly variable wing configurations between tracks and even multiple wing types at the same track to allow for different localised conditions.

Even Top Moth Sailors have at least 2 sets of foils to choose from, some rumoured to run 4 sets - choosing 2 to measure in per event.

 

BUT

 

Americas Cup, with their small budgets and Rule sets where two different sets of foils are permitted - and each can be permitted to run interchangable tips to further widen their sweet spot, WILL NOT do so because the self proclaimed Lord of FaiLing is CONVINCED that just one set of foils can Harry Potter magically be Canted to allow the absolute highest performance across the whole wind range of 6 to 25 knots.

 

(Remember, this was the same VilLage iDiot who was CONVINCED that the platform twist in the Oracle AC72 platform was a good thing; that it was deliberate so as to generate RM off the windward rudder....... )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So airliners deploy massive flaps for landing but fully retract for cruising speed.

Motorsport of most flavours and types have different tyres for wet, intermediate and dry, soft, ultra soft etc.

Open wheelers have different front and rear wings depending on whether they are running high speed ovals or tracks.

F1 runs highly variable wing configurations between tracks and even multiple wing types at the same track to allow for different localised conditions.

Even Top Moth Sailors have at least 2 sets of foils to choose from, some rumoured to run 4 sets - choosing 2 to measure in per event.

 

BUT

 

Americas Cup, with their small budgets and Rule sets where two different sets of foils are permitted - and each can be permitted to run interchangable tips to further widen their sweet spot, WILL NOT do so because the self proclaimed Lord of FaiLing is CONVINCED that just one set of foils can Harry Potter magically be Canted to allow the absolute highest performance across the whole wind range of 6 to 25 knots.

 

(Remember, this was the same VilLage iDiot who was CONVINCED that the platform twist in the Oracle AC72 platform was a good thing; that it was deliberate so as to generate RM off the windward rudder....... )

 

And now the rule allows differential rudder movement to do just that. And I was wrong?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

(Remember, this was the same VilLage iDiot who was CONVINCED that the platform twist in the Oracle AC72 platform was a good thing; that it was deliberate so as to generate RM off the windward rudder....... )

 

And now the rule allows differential rudder movement to do just that. And I was wrong?!

 

Yes. The platform twist was a relic of the archimedean (non foiling) design, intended to warp the crosswings to produce aerodynamic downforce/increase the endplate coupling on the windward side, and aerodynamic lift on the leeward side. It was a total liability once they went to 100% lift on the foils.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fact: the twist did produce downforce on the windward rudder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fact: the twist did produce downforce on the windward rudder.

Fact: AFAIK, the twisting platform was originally developed for Dogzilla. There were no 'T foils' on the rudders.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, you're wrong.

 

pix by Guilain Grenier:

post-30-0-96770700-1493670627_thumb.jpg

post-30-0-88881300-1493670807_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, you're wrong.

 

pix by Guilain Grenier:

Boat one twisted like a motherfucker. Nobody is arguing that. Boat one was also NOT initially designed to foil. WTF is it with you making up strawman arguments and then arguing with yourself?

 

Show me a pic of boat TWO twisting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were there "T" rudders in AC34? sounds like a simple resolution?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

meanwhile....

 

Could this be one of them?

 

18209064_10154370514086087_7008706434544

Pardon my ignorance,can anyone tell me what's that tube or hose running along the foil?
You may be looking at a tube ousting an uphaul ram. It's astonishing how fast some boats can raise and lower them, even through water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were there "T" rudders in AC34? sounds like a simple resolution?

Of course. My point was simply that the twisting platform was developed for AC33, where there were NO 'T' rudders, so Doug's claim that the twist was intended to produce downforce via the windward rudder was incorrect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

meanwhile....

 

Could this be one of them?

 

18209064_10154370514086087_7008706434544

Pardon my ignorance,can anyone tell me what's that tube or hose running along the foil?
You may be looking at a tube ousting an uphaul ram. It's astonishing how fast some boats can raise and lower them, even through water.

 

Thanks, realize that . Got confused by the picture-. That's why I deleted the post-.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(Remember, this was the same VilLage iDiot who was CONVINCED that the platform twist in the Oracle AC72 platform was a good thing; that it was deliberate so as to generate RM off the windward rudder....... )

 

Here's what I actually did say about platform twist and rudder downforce. The discussion was about whether it would be faster to sail a 72 at an angle of heel with the windward rudder out or not. This was on page 18 of this forum, in the "Flight-Oracle/TNZ-Technical Speculation/ Facts" thread and page 1 of that thread, post 40:

 

You're right about the drawing, Simon. I'm using "paint" and am not very good with it. Here is another one. I'm convinced that they would want the boat to heel as little as possible consistent with the windward rudder out UNLESS they use the twist of the platform to allow the rudder to pull down which could add 2400lb of downforce at the transom and be perfectly legal.(one of the syndicate heads said they were targeting the high end of the weight range-downforce from the rudder would allow them to target the minimum weight and still have more RM when they need it-see The Daily Sail article.) I'm convinced that minimum heel is faster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

(Remember, this was the same VilLage iDiot who was CONVINCED that the platform twist in the Oracle AC72 platform was a good thing; that it was deliberate so as to generate RM off the windward rudder....... )

 

Here's what I actually did say about platform twist and rudder downforce. The discussion was about whether it would be faster to sail a 72 at an angle of heel with the windward rudder out or not. This was on page 18 of this forum, in the "Flight-Oracle/TNZ-Technical Speculation/ Facts" thread and page 1 of that thread, post 40:

 

You're right about the drawing, Simon. I'm using "paint" and am not very good with it. Here is another one. I'm convinced that they would want the boat to heel as little as possible consistent with the windward rudder out UNLESS they use the twist of the platform to allow the rudder to pull down which could add 2400lb of downforce at the transom and be perfectly legal.(one of the syndicate heads said they were targeting the high end of the weight range-downforce from the rudder would allow them to target the minimum weight and still have more RM when they need it-see The Daily Sail article.) I'm convinced that minimum heel is faster.

 

For the twisting platform to produce downforce, the stern needs to go UP.

 

2400lbs of downforce applied at the rudder - the extreme tail end of the boat, so there is maximum lever arm - would pull it DOWN. In other words, it wouldn't add righting moment, it would 'UNTWIST' the platform.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course the stern would go up and the bow down(of the windward hull as compared to the lee hull) as is clearly shown in the two pictures of the twisted platform I posted.

As forces go on a boat that size 2400lbs is not that great but because it is happening so far to windward the ft.lbs of RM is tremendous. It obviously didn't "untwist" the boat in the two pictures I posted showing the windward rudder foils in the water so we know for sure that the foil was developing downforce at least in the second picture.

The fact that the small rudder foil can develop righting moment on the new boats with differential rudder rake is probably a result of what was learned with the twisted platform with a fixed rudder AOI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, Doug, you have managed to duck the issues regarding the 2 foil strategy by entering into a pointless debate. How does it feel to have Nathan Outteridege confirming today that they are using a 2 foil strategy, having taken delievery of their light wind foils this week and used them for the first time. This confirms what can be seen from the videos, that they are using 2 different sorts of foil.

 

Why have you failed to answer the reasonable questions I asked at the end of my last post. I have discussed this without resorting to insults and treated you politely, so please reply in the same vain, rather than your usual "you don't understand" which is both insulting and unproductive. I will aks the questions again.

 

1. Please give us some details of the risks in a 2 foil strategy. Read my analysis and tell us what is wrong and why you think the risks are higher.

 

2. Please provide any evidence that teams are using a one foil strategy (and don't quote Nick Holroyd again because he says nothing about different foils and talks only about adjusting them)

 

Thanks :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course the stern would go up and the bow down(of the windward hull as compared to the lee hull) as is clearly shown in the two pictures of the twisted platform I posted.

As forces go on a boat that size 2400lbs is not that great but because it is happening so far to windward the ft.lbs of RM is tremendous. It obviously didn't "untwist" the boat in the two pictures I posted showing the windward rudder foils in the water so we know for sure that the foil was developing downforce at least in the second picture.

The fact that the small rudder foil can develop righting moment on the new boats with differential rudder rake is probably a result of what was learned with the twisted platform with a fixed rudder AOI.

 

How do you know that? Your made-up numbers are simply made up.

 

The moment developed by 2400 lbs acting at approximately 25 ft (the distance from rudder to the CG) is 60,000 ft-lbs. If you don't think that would significantly 'untwist' the platform, you're on crack.

 

Here's another way to look at it - where would the 60,000 plus ft-lbs of moment in the opposite direction necessary to counter act that load on the flexible platform come from? And that would be just to get to equilibrium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FFS, why don't you fuckers just ease off on Doug Lord?? Disagree with his opinions by all means, but the lynch-mob mentality is ugly!!

 

Plot twist.

 

It's not a lynch mob, it's actually just a thousand people that Doug has gone out of his way to piss off and insult individually, when he happens to be wrong, and pretty much everyone else is right, but because of that it looks like everyone is "ganging up" because it's just a bunch of sailors trying to provide the right facts, while his retorts are "you are wrong and uninformed".

 

If he can't handle it he can fuck off. He's brought it upon himself, and if he uses people drawings without permission or shares them with misinformation, or quotes people incorrectly to torture it to seem like it said what he wants not what they actually said and calls other people "wrong" and provides no explanations, then he deserves to have people all hate him and ridicule him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^

Perhaps not hate him, but Doug is reaping what he sowed.

Besides, largely what he has suffered has been pretty light mockery.

 

The four fuckwits of the apocalypse got stuck into me far worse for having the temerity to email etnz on mihbda's behalf.

 

I doubt Doug has hurty feelings and if he does he needs to htfu.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, Doug, you have managed to duck the issues regarding the 2 foil strategy by entering into a pointless debate. How does it feel to have Nathan Outteridege confirming today that they are using a 2 foil strategy, having taken delievery of their light wind foils this week and used them for the first time. This confirms what can be seen from the videos, that they are using 2 different sorts of foil.

 

Why have you failed to answer the reasonable questions I asked at the end of my last post. I have discussed this without resorting to insults and treated you politely, so please reply in the same vain, rather than your usual "you don't understand" which is both insulting and unproductive. I will aks the questions again.

 

1. Please give us some details of the risks in a 2 foil strategy. Read my analysis and tell us what is wrong and why you think the risks are higher.

 

2. Please provide any evidence that teams are using a one foil strategy (and don't quote Nick Holroyd again because he says nothing about different foils and talks only about adjusting them)

 

Thanks :)

🤦‍♂️Maybe DL had u on ignore like most do to him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So airliners deploy massive flaps for landing but fully retract for cruising speed.

Motorsport of most flavours and types have different tyres for wet, intermediate and dry, soft, ultra soft etc.

Open wheelers have different front and rear wings depending on whether they are running high speed ovals or tracks.

F1 runs highly variable wing configurations between tracks and even multiple wing types at the same track to allow for different localised conditions.

Even Top Moth Sailors have at least 2 sets of foils to choose from, some rumoured to run 4 sets - choosing 2 to measure in per event.

 

BUT

 

Americas Cup, with their small budgets and Rule sets where two different sets of foils are permitted - and each can be permitted to run interchangable tips to further widen their sweet spot, WILL NOT do so because the self proclaimed Lord of FaiLing is CONVINCED that just one set of foils can Harry Potter magically be Canted to allow the absolute highest performance across the whole wind range of 6 to 25 knots.

 

(Remember, this was the same VilLage iDiot who was CONVINCED that the platform twist in the Oracle AC72 platform was a good thing; that it was deliberate so as to generate RM off the windward rudder....... )

 

And now the rule allows differential rudder movement to do just that. And I was wrong?!

 

 

YES - you were wrong then, and you are wrong NOW.

 

Do not try to transpose, some, of what is going on now to ameliorate your errors of the past.

This is why you are such a deluded backyard tinkerer - you cannot take some of the forces that may be generated and isolate them in a magic bubble.

 

Need to consider the whole situation including the drag, and unwinding of the platform that would be necessary, before you can get your RM to magically operate.

 

This is the same cherry picking that your persistently do on all your favourite topics - the current one being that you believe one set of foils can magically be Optimal in every speed and direction situation; despite the evidence, laws of physics and every contributor telling you that it cannot.

 

Put your personal hatred of all LorD unBeliebers aside and let the Tsunami of Failing wash you clean........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^

Perhaps not hate him, but Doug is reaping what he sowed.

Besides, largely what he has suffered has been pretty light mockery.

 

The four fuckwits of the apocalypse got stuck into me far worse for having the temerity to email etnz on mihbda's behalf.

 

I doubt Doug has hurty feelings and if he does he needs to htfu.

 

I just laugh at them, that's the price you pay with the internet. You get to see things you wouldn't normally, however you gotta put up with "those people".

 

I've seen loads of people from here at events around the place (well I was sailing and knew them long before I signed up here so maybe it's the other way around) but they're all normal, they contribute great content, have great ideas, aren't complete twats, but I never happen to see any of "those people" anywhere special, I wonder why?

 

Sailing isn't my only sport, and I can tell you everything I follow on the internet has those people, like I'm a keen spear-fisher, and there's people in the online boards who the entire community wish would just fuck off because all they do is talk shit and never dive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Yeah but...........if this forum was restricted to active spearfishers AC competitors - for sure there'd be a lot less bollocks, but it might be a bit too quiet don't you think! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

^

Perhaps not hate him, but Doug is reaping what he sowed.

Besides, largely what he has suffered has been pretty light mockery.

 

The four fuckwits of the apocalypse got stuck into me far worse for having the temerity to email etnz on mihbda's behalf.

 

I doubt Doug has hurty feelings and if he does he needs to htfu.

 

I just laugh at them, that's the price you pay with the internet. You get to see things you wouldn't normally, however you gotta put up with "those people".

 

I've seen loads of people from here at events around the place (well I was sailing and knew them long before I signed up here so maybe it's the other way around) but they're all normal, they contribute great content, have great ideas, aren't complete twats, but I never happen to see any of "those people" anywhere special, I wonder why?

 

Sailing isn't my only sport, and I can tell you everything I follow on the internet has those people, like I'm a keen spear-fisher, and there's people in the online boards who the entire community wish would just fuck off because all they do is talk shit and never dive.

 

yeah, but on any forum there's always people that are only there to disrupt and push their agendas at the expense of good informed conversation and sharing of ideas. It's been going on since the days of Usenet.

 

If a forum admin wants to get rid of disruptions, its very easy. The problem is that SA, for whatever reason, would rather see all of the Mothies and A-Class sailors pack up and leave than deal with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doug

 

I have tried to be polite, but you are making it very hard. If you insist in posting your views ad norsiam but refuse to discuss rational arguments against them, you are even less of a man than anybody suggests you are. Your arguments of "you don't understand" or "I have already answered that" do not stack up because in the first case, it is your job to help people understand your arguments and in the second case, you have not provided any answers to the questions I asked except for saying it is what you believe, without anything to back it up.

 

To be clear, we are still waiting for your answers to the following

 

1. Please give us some details of the risks in a 2 foil strategy. Read my analysis and tell us what is wrong and why you think the risks are higher.

 

2. Please provide any evidence that teams are using a one foil strategy (and don't quote Nick Holroyd again because he says nothing about different foils and talks only about adjusting them)

 

Since first asking, 2 teams have specifically stated they are using a 2 foil strategy and this is supported by picture evidence while Coutts has implied (again) that everybody is using a 2 foil strategy. Again, I have to assume you think it is all a lie and/or illusion.

 

Or is the real issue that you aren't man enough to admit when you are wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You must be right-how could anyone doubt what a team says about foils before the Cup has started. And I must say you are simply brilliant to realize that........

And so very insightful........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You must be right-how could anyone doubt what a team says about foils before the Cup has started. And I must say you are simply brilliant to realize that........

And so very insightful........

 

More evidence you are a complete fuckwit and a troll. You are totally unable to enter into a proper debate on any subject and your arrogance is astonishing. You have made no attempt at making your case yet you attack anybody who does make a case that disproves what you claim. Time and again, you are shown to be wrong, just like on this occasion and just like you have done in the past, your only and default option is to attempt to belittle or attack. It is truly pathetic, but thanks once again for reminding us what a waste of space you are on this forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You must be right-how could anyone doubt what a team says about foils before the Cup has started. And I must say you are simply brilliant to realize that........

And so very insightful........

 

 

GIVE A FUCKING EXPLANATION OR EVERYONE WILL FOREVER HARASS, RIDICULE AND INSULT YOU.

 

It's not that we're even listening to them, it's that we can physically see 2 different sets CURRENTLY in use in the boats, of which one set is clearly larger, longer and more optimised to light air, and one set clearly smaller, shorter and more optimised to heavy air. So it's not that we are listening to them, it's that you must be fucking blind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, it's kicking off in here isn't it....take a breath everyone...only 24 days to go...all will be revealed...possibly 🤔

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

once again----

 

 

 

The fact is that almost every foil shown so far has the capability of being used as an uptip foil OR NOT. Thats why cant is the key to the versatile use of the new foils and why most foils shown so far can perform across a wide spectrum........

 

 

The new generation AC foils have nothing to do with auto-correct ride height, whether they have 'uptip' profiles or not.

 

Sting, actually that depends on the cant angle of the foil. A straight "L" foil can be canted so that it has nearly zero intrinsic altitude control OR it can be canted so that it develops the intrinsic altitude control of an uptip foil.

This isn't speculation its fact and proven by the straight "L" foils used on the foiling tri Maserati where the foils are installed in the ama at a large angle so that when the foil is immersed it works like an uptip foil controlling the flight altitude of the ama(in conjunction with a rudder T-foil). Maserati could not fly unless the foil worked exactly this way.

An uptip foil on an AC boat that is canted bottom out so that there is no leeway coupling will be relatively unstable and require constant adjustment. Canted the other way it will work as an uptip foil with some degree of intrinsic altitude control.

 

 

 

What matters and all that matters is the shape of the foil as it goes thru the water under load. If it is a 90 degree straight "L" with a vertical shaft under no load then it is likely to "become" a foil with uptip foil characteristics under load.

Nothing brought that home to me as much as the straight "L" (installed at an angle) used on Maserati that works like an uptip foil.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It was driven home to me a couple of months ago and I posted about it then: a foil DOES NOT have to have UptiP geometry to work like an UptiP foil-a fact that was proven beyond a shadow of doubt by Maserati . They used a straight "L" foil mounted in an angled trunk so that when the foil was immersed it worked like an UptiP foil controlling the altitude of the ama. What Nick Holroyd was pointing out in the previous post is exactly the same thing, as he showed and said. The way cant causes increased stability is by reconfiguring a foil so that going thru the water the foil acts to some degree like an UptiP foil, increasing stability.

The new ,precise and very quick, control systems allow this to be done at will to suit conditions and allow a foil to be optimized for the conditions it's actually sailing in. This drastically expands the viable range of the foil and makes the choice of foil on any one race day much less critical.

 

j8jl84.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And so on......

 

The biggest reason that light air and heavy air specialist foils are likely to be wrong is the high probability of the conditions changing during a race day! A specialist foil won't allow the Team to reconfigure the foil for changes in conditions. A foil specifically designed to be able to function like an optimized foil in any condition will allow the Team to be fast regardless of the conditions. Otherwise, it's a huge gamble if you pick one of two different foils for a race day, either one of which could wind up being dead wrong when conditions change in the middle of the days racing. I'm convinced the technology exists to design a foil that will be capable of being configured(using cant, rake, rudder rake and other adjustments to the boat and wing) to work as well as a "traditionally" optimized foil would. Assuming such a foil is possible, the foil allotment for that team is effectively doubled, reducing the chance of disaster due to any cause and giving that Team a very comfortable margin compared to the Teams with half as many viable foils.

This would be a major breakthru with these boats and a state secret with any Team doing the development required to make this work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here again:

 

 

 

Nick Holroyd 3:38 in:

 

"Secondary axis of cant we can use to modify the orientation of the board in a way that ,perhaps, gives us ,more or less stability. From a mode that is unstable but fast to a more stable but easier to sail kind of mode"

modify the orientation of the board= to reconfigure the board

 

 

 

You're welcome-the best video on foils by any team so far! It's the first confirmation by any team of my theory of using cant to reconfigure foils-something I've said for a long time. Pretty cool! See 3:40 in for cant....

 

 

The difference shown below is just cant. Sketch below first posted in January 2017:

 

2em39si.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, it's kicking off in here isn't it....take a breath everyone...only 24 days to go...all will be revealed...possibly

Wait until there is something really controversial, like (hypothetically of course) someone protesting ETNZ for have broken the foil rules because (say) they re-introduce 2 sets of racing foils, but have modified either them or the stand-in foils since the breakage.

 

Then it would really kick off

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Wow, it's kicking off in here isn't it....take a breath everyone...only 24 days to go...all will be revealed...possibly

Wait until there is something really controversial, like (hypothetically of course) someone protesting ETNZ for have broken the foil rules because (say) they re-introduce 2 sets of racing foils, but have modified either them or the stand-in foils since the breakage.

 

Then it would really kick off

 

We have seen two sets of TNZ foils, but does somebody know if the second one was a T foil or their AC one ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ I think that it would be impossible to prove any modifications were beyond the allowable limits without having access to the confidential MC files .... so, yes, that would be really controversial and blow this place up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

judging by your login, it was the pom's that lodged the protest then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites