• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  
pacice

Foiling Monohull - what would it look like?

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Battleship said:

I don't think it will have a canting keel, more like a giant sport boat with foils. Possibly racks and wires.

In a recent Bernasconi article RG posted, he did not rule out canters and mentioned batteries and PLC's as possibilities, for 'at the extreme end of the spectrum.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/1/2017 at 3:31 PM, Doug Lord said:

NZAC Sailplan ,version one
Based on these calcu-guestimates:
A) At 90 degrees the force holding the boat there is 171,926 ft.lbs.
The force trying to right the boat is 483,800lb
1-keel weight 19782 lb @ 20'
2-buoyancy from pod-4608lb @20'

3- Wing mast 115' above deck

4-SA=3191 sq.ft./ CE 59' above center of lift of keel/foil combo
-----
-b Weights----
1) hull weight-8572 lb
2) keel weight 19782lb
3) rig weight 2915lb
4) crew weight 1900lb
5)TOTAL DISPL.= 33168 lb
-----
C) RM on Foils:
1) HM at 59' with 2.5lb/sq/ft. pressure= 470,672 ft.lb.
2) RM, boat slightly heeled, mast vertical=569,418 ft.lb.
-----
D) Foil Loading one main foil in the water supporting 80% of the load=
18' X 2.5' chord foil fully immersed=589lb/sq.ft.

E) Fully retractable main foils for lightest air sailing.

F) Upper third of main could possibly be designed as a solid sail with two panels. When the whole sail is reefed this section would slide down. Needs study but may be effective.

G) From my analysis the thing may need a canting keel-not for ultimate RM but to start out. Needs much more study. Probably has great potential IF the target weight is within about 6000lb  of the 31268lb total boat weight( for this first run) including keel.

NZAC SAILPLAN, version 1,  9-29-17 004.JPG

NZAC revised   9-7-17 003.JPG

NZAC ONE     9-25-17  dl 002 - Copy.JPG

Probably wouldn't be a big deal to make this fixed keel cant and would definitely save some weight.

Pivoting the boards allows both to 100% retract for non-foiling sailing BUT rig would have to be reefed if foils weren't used in most wind conditions. I hope that TNZ goes at least somewhat in this direction to break new ground and provide spectacular sailing!

Share this post


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

Yeah, because they could never have done something different than a boat designed to sail within the bay of Bermuda?  What a stupid thing to say.  I tend to think Gitana Tri could survive the dreaded Kiwi bay, but obviously, they would not have to go anywhere near that extreme. 

I'm quoting Dalton, thats why he said they cant have an event with the Bermuda boats. Sure if they are 120' long they might be ok but clearly they dont want the same type of boat, its over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Sailabout said:

I'm quoting Dalton, thats why he said they cant have an event with the Bermuda boats. Sure if they are 120' long they might be ok but clearly they dont want the same type of boat, its over.

It would not have to be any more than even 50', if they wanted, they could easily design more robustly for more seas.  Ideally, a 60-76 boat would be opted for, but well designed, foiling works in the seas that would be present off Auckland.  You are right that they don't want to go multis (at least the Italians don't), but the point is, it was a silly thing to claim on the basis that the Bermuda boats could not handle it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, GauchoGreg said:

It would not have to be any more than even 50', if they wanted, they could easily design more robustly for more seas.  Ideally, a 60-76 boat would be opted for, but well designed, foiling works in the seas that would be present off Auckland.  You are right that they don't want to go multis (at least the Italians don't), but the point is, it was a silly thing to claim on the basis that the Bermuda boats could not handle it.

Dalton said it because they nose dived their boat several times when they had the right conditions so he  knew you couldnt have a regatta with them.

Nothing to do with strength, just basic physics, boat size versus wave size.

Share this post


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

Hull will resemble a boat

I should certainly hope so :blink:

 

Dougsboat copy.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As one of this pleasure on this forum is to try to guess:

- wide boat with low hull

- 2 T foil rudder + flaps

- 2 L foils on the side + flaps

- wing mast + reefable sails

- 12 sailors, no stored energy

- foils in 8 kts

- 30 kts wind limit.

Let's wait an see...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Sailabout said:

Yep,

will the foils be retractable?

Will it have any lead and will that cant?

Concept 1: L foils retractable

Concpet 2: Z foils retractable but sailed both down

Both with lead in the keel for safety.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tornado-Cat said:

Concept 1: L foils retractable

Concpet 2: Z foils retractable but sailed both down

Both with lead in the keel for safety.

but not too safe, its a spectator sport after all ( or trying to be)

Rules to allow lead removal during the regatta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Sailabout said:

but not too safe, its a spectator sport after all ( or trying to be)

Rules to allow lead removal during the regatta

Another guess is that option 3, with exterior "Ben Hur blades", was eliminated because too dangerous.

Share this post


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

It would not have to be any more than even 50', if they wanted, they could easily design more robustly for more seas.  Ideally, a 60-76 boat would be opted for, but well designed, foiling works in the seas that would be present off Auckland.  You are right that they don't want to go multis (at least the Italians don't), but the point is, it was a silly thing to claim on the basis that the Bermuda boats could not handle it.

You simply design and build the boat to meet the expected conditions. ETNZ managed to train fairly well in these waters, with some level of success.

While the conditions off Auckland can be windy and rough, more likely than not, it will be a 8 to 12 knot sea breeze but with a lumpy chop to content with.

the current fairings and foils were designed for the light wind/flat water conditions of Bermuda, and there is no reason why you couldn't add a bit more carbon to have them withstand 20 to 25 knots of wind. You would also design the foils to give a higher level of control, as speed/power would not be an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One reason ETNZ went with a mono, is it will guarantee more entries into the 36th AC. The reasons for that is firstly it is outside the USA, and there will be multiple USA challenges, and secondly the rich old men who pay the bills all think they can sail a large monohull, but they are certain they can't sail a high performance Multihull.

I personally feel any boat that can be used as a tourist charter boat after the racing is not a high performance boat, and will not full test the skills of the best sailors in the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, pacice said:

You simply design and build the boat to meet the expected conditions. ETNZ managed to train fairly well in these waters, with some level of success.

While the conditions off Auckland can be windy and rough, more likely than not, it will be a 8 to 12 knot sea breeze but with a lumpy chop to content with.

the current fairings and foils were designed for the light wind/flat water conditions of Bermuda, and there is no reason why you couldn't add a bit more carbon to have them withstand 20 to 25 knots of wind. You would also design the foils to give a higher level of control, as speed/power would not be an issue.

read the thread..

Dalton said the boats are unsuitable for Auckland after having trained in them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sailabout said:

read the thread..

Dalton said the boats are unsuitable for Auckland after having trained in them

Well the AC50 as it was for the last cup was unsuitable but it wouldn't have taken much to make it suitable. A small and big wing plus some extra beef in key components. 

Luckily etnz didn't choose that route because I'm glad to see the back of the things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, jaysper said:

Well the AC50 as it was for the last cup was unsuitable but it wouldn't have taken much to make it suitable. A small and big wing plus some extra beef in key components. 

Luckily etnz didn't choose that route because I'm glad to see the back of the things.

DOH

take a foiling boat out in waves too big or bad swell and tell me how it goes, has SFA to do with strength

Watch a vid of the Moth worlds on the bay in Victoria a couple of years ago

Share this post


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

I should certainly hope so :blink:

 

Dougsboat copy.jpg

Thanks Hoom... :) ... my point was around it not looking like a mechano “girder and skin” lakeboat foiler. Nor a trapeze-aflicted super-skiff. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jaysper said:

Well the AC50 as it was for the last cup was unsuitable but it wouldn't have taken much to make it suitable. A small and big wing plus some extra beef in key components. 

It would have been interesting to see what a fully automated ride height system produced. Limit battery capacity solely by volume to encourage battery capacity/unit volume and efficient use of stored power. Map the water surface to predict wave patterns and required foil adjustments. Keep humans for sail control and steering, just piss off the cyclists and game controllers.

Canting keels and water ballast are agricultural in comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Yep. Just implement the ETNZ foil control system with a lithium cell of fixed capacity, and let the boys have at it on the race course. Would've been insanely cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole sail trim, foil adjust and heading for best speed, tack before the boundary etc could have been automatic, but would that be sailing?

The rules didnt allow it so as far as we know the computer continually created a solution and GA had to just press to agree which fits the rule of no automation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ I would imagine that the sailors continually learned from the computer, so I'm sure they did a fair amount of 'sailing' - but for sure the computer did as well. I would think the way forward would be to acknowledge the computer, and incorporate it where it makes the most sense - staying on the foils - but essentially outlaw it for stuff like wing trim, heading tactics etc. So the boat would essentially fly itself, but for the rest the sailors would just have rudimentary instruments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, surfsailor said:

^ I would imagine that the sailors continually learned from the computer, so I'm sure they did a fair amount of 'sailing' - but for sure the computer did as well. I would think the way forward would be to acknowledge the computer, and incorporate it where it makes the most sense - staying on the foils - but essentially outlaw it for stuff like wing trim, heading tactics etc. So the boat would essentially fly itself, but for the rest the sailors would just have rudimentary instruments.

all the adjustments and results had to go into the computer first, lots of sailing to tune but after that bingo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ My understanding was the touch pad over a screen was a workaround to allow the computer to fly the boat by running it thru a human - basically the sailor was just tracking a moving target on a screen with his index finger rather than making decisions and acting on them. Which, coincidentally, is only possible if your hands are freed up by pedal powered hydraulics.

My point was why not embrace part of that (foil control), and just make it legal - no trackpad - and then make the rest not legal. Seems like a happy compromise that would keep the boats in the air going 40 plus kts, but still be sailed like big dinghies where split second decisions are key.

Share this post


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

^ My understanding was the touch pad over a screen was a workaround to allow the computer to fly the boat by running it thru a human - basically the sailor was just tracking a moving target on a screen with his index finger rather than making decisions and acting on them. Which, coincidentally, is only possible if your hands are freed up by pedal powered hydraulics.

rules said no automation so computer cant move anything with the operator doing it, so that allows a yes, yes, yes, yes continual button push.

I am gob smacked Oracle didnt do it as they pioneered this way back on the other multis.

The wing allowed the sail to be full of sensors which is what allowed it all to work easily

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't get the whole "The AC50 couldn't hack it - so monos" talk ^

With half the effort they are putting into reinventing monos they could have taken the AC50 or a Mod 70 as a basis and then moved things around, added and subtracted until they got what they needed. The AC50 rule was totally restricted, put your foils here, only so deep, only so wide, only move them on these axes, no flaps, rudders like this, power and control restrictions etc.

Get rid of that nonsense and tell me you couldn't have a great AC multi and advance the art even further....of course you could, so don't waste your breath and claim that alone is the reason for the change.

Share this post


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

Don't get the whole "The AC50 couldn't hack it - so monos" talk ^

With half the effort they are putting into reinventing monos they could have taken the AC50 or a Mod 70 as a basis and then moved things around, added and subtracted until they got what they needed. The AC50 rule was totally restricted, put your foils here, only so deep, only so wide, only move them on these axes, no flaps, rudders like this, power and control restrictions etc.

Get rid of that nonsense and tell me you couldn't have a great AC multi and advance the art even further....of course you could, so don't waste your breath and claim that alone is the reason for the change.

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ It wasn't a binary decision like that. Etnz also wanted to bring the cup back to a vessel more aligned to the majority of sailors. Also didn't like the cost and logistics of full winged boats. Why not develop mono rather than soft sail heavy cats?

Share this post


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

^ My understanding was the touch pad over a screen was a workaround to allow the computer to fly the boat by running it thru a human - basically the sailor was just tracking a moving target on a screen with his index finger rather than making decisions and acting on them. Which, coincidentally, is only possible if your hands are freed up by pedal powered hydraulics.

My point was why not embrace part of that (foil control), and just make it legal - no trackpad - and then make the rest not legal. Seems like a happy compromise that would keep the boats in the air going 40 plus kts, but still be sailed like big dinghies where split second decisions are key.

Etnz have already said they liked their clever work around, but that they see it as a loophole point for the rules that existed, and not core sailing. They'll remove dot chasing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ie: remove it, but won't replace it with computer controlled ride management.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RC Test boats:    I wonder if large(8'-20' or so) radio controlled boats would be legal as a way around the "no tank testing" rule?

Share this post


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

^ My understanding was the touch pad over a screen was a workaround to allow the computer to fly the boat by running it thru a human - basically the sailor was just tracking a moving target on a screen with his index finger rather than making decisions and acting on them. Which, coincidentally, is only possible if your hands are freed up by pedal powered hydraulics.

My point was why not embrace part of that (foil control), and just make it legal - no trackpad - and then make the rest not legal. Seems like a happy compromise that would keep the boats in the air going 40 plus kts, but still be sailed like big dinghies where split second decisions are key.

Why not use foils that don't require constant adjustment? Like "Q" foils?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Sailabout said:

Dalton said it because they nose dived their boat several times when they had the right conditions so he  knew you couldnt have a regatta with them.

Nothing to do with strength, just basic physics, boat size versus wave size.

Not just wave size, but design, as well.  They were sailing a boat designed for flat water.  Had they designed for those conditions, the boat would have been different.

Share this post


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

Don't get the whole "The AC50 couldn't hack it - so monos" talk ^

With half the effort they are putting into reinventing monos they could have taken the AC50 or a Mod 70 as a basis and then moved things around, added and subtracted until they got what they needed. The AC50 rule was totally restricted, put your foils here, only so deep, only so wide, only move them on these axes, no flaps, rudders like this, power and control restrictions etc.

Get rid of that nonsense and tell me you couldn't have a great AC multi and advance the art even further....of course you could, so don't waste your breath and claim that alone is the reason for the change.

Ditto this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, HFC Hunter said:

^ It wasn't a binary decision like that. Etnz also wanted to bring the cup back to a vessel more aligned to the majority of sailors. Also didn't like the cost and logistics of full winged boats. Why not develop mono rather than soft sail heavy cats?

And if you think what they end up with will be any "more aligned to the majority of sailors", you are completely high.  Well, unless its performance is absolute shit.  And that would be nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A foiling Vendee hasn't much alignment with a 4ktsb, but I reckon most boat owners recognise the link as being closer than a 5ktsb cat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, HFC Hunter said:

A foiling Vendee hasn't much alignment with a 4ktsb, but I reckon most boat owners recognise the link as being closer than a 5ktsb cat

A foiling IMOCA would be a shit match racer compared to what we have been seeing, and if they go with that (or anything remotely similar), it will be a HUGE downturn in the quality of racing we should expect.  And if they go with a mono that WOULD be similarly performing/exciting, the appendages and instability of such a mono-trying-to-be-a-cat will be just as far away from alignment with the Every-Day-Sailor as the AC50s. 

Share this post


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

A foiling IMOCA would be a shit match racer compared to what we have been seeing, and if they go with that (or anything remotely similar), it will be a HUGE downturn in the quality of racing we should expect.  And if they go with a mono that WOULD be similarly performing/exciting, the appendages and instability of such a mono-trying-to-be-a-cat will be just as far away from alignment with the Every-Day-Sailor as the AC50s. 

You couldn't be more wrong........ And this "mono trying to be a cat" is just BS. There is tremendous design room for drastic improvements in monohull keelboat design and to imply that there isn't is just as blind as the idiots who said match racing on foils could never occur with a cat. They were proven totally wrong in 34 with the greatest match racing ever to occur in the AC.

Hopefully, option three will be chosen and that could lead -again- to spectacular match racing and to a tremendous sailing spectacle!! TNZ can do it but the only question is will they do it.

"....alignment with the Every-Day-Sailor......" That is just nonsense-a great boat that sails extraordinarily well will send a spark of enthusiasm thru sailors and non sailors alike!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Doug Lord said:

You couldn't be more wrong........ And this "mono trying to be a cat" is just BS. There is tremendous design room for drastic improvements in monohull keelboat design and to imply that there isn't is just as blind as the idiots who said match racing on foils could never occur with a cat. They were proven totally wrong in 34 with the greatest match racing ever to occur in the AC.

Hopefully, option three will be chosen and that could lead -again- to spectacular match racing and to a tremendous sailing spectacle!! TNZ can do it but the only question is will they do it.

Actually, Doug, I'm not wrong.  If not for rules restricting multi-hulls, not one designer would opt for a mono-hull hauling lead, and all of these design ideas are efforts to replicate the righting moment naturally provided by a multihull.  It takes a rule restricting multi-hulls to force the designers into going with one big hull held upright by a big clump of lead.  That is not to say they can't come up with a fast design and have good racing, but the facts are the facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those "facts" are only valid in the sense that an option 3 mono has never been tried and people gravitate to what they know-or think they know. Option three could produce a mono close in speed to or faster than a cat with exceptional handling in waves and exceptional safety in that they would be self-righting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Doug Lord said:

Those "facts" are only valid in the sense that an option 3 mono has never been tried and people gravitate to what they know-or think they know. Option three could produce a mono close in speed to or faster than a cat with exceptional handling in waves and exceptional safety in that they would be self-righting.

Physics, dougie.  You are talking something that has never existed, nor is it something that the physics support (for a mono to have righting moment it needs lead OR a beam so wide it may as well be a multi, or some Swiss-Army Knife set of appendages).  Less wetted surface, less drag... lead pulls more boat into the water = more wetted surface.  Wider beam, more righting moment, more power.  More beam with one hull, more wetted surface.  A bunch of appendages.... they act essentially as the multiple hulls in a cat or tri.  So, again, we go through manipulations to make a mono more like a multi.  And that was the point I and others are making... one should ask what the point is, and given the concepts (look no further than your sketches), the point of going back to monos to be more relatable.... how does that work out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, GauchoGreg said:

Physics, dougie.  You are talking something that has never existed, nor is it something that the physics support (for a mono to have righting moment it needs lead OR a beam so wide it may as well be a multi, or some Swiss-Army Knife set of appendages).  Less wetted surface, less drag... lead pulls more boat into the water = more wetted surface.  Wider beam, more righting moment, more power.  More beam with one hull, more wetted surface.  A bunch of appendages.... they act essentially as the multiple hulls in a cat or tri.  So, again, we go through manipulations to make a mono more like a multi.  And that was the point I and others are making... one should ask what the point is, and given the concepts (look no further than your sketches), the point of going back to monos to be more relatable.... how does that work out?

 gauchie- that is just silly-and an incredible distortion of the word "physics"!  What a simplistic, uninformed way to look at high performance monofoiler keelboat design. Nothing like a cat: the cat gets its RM from widely separated hulls-the NZAC(option 3) gets its maximum RM from the lift on its main foil--only TWO foils in the water vs 3 for the cat. In a pitchpole or knockdown NZAC will right itself-again, NOTHING LIKE A CAT!!!!!

"...relatable.." ,   "....alignment with the Every-Day-Sailor......" Once again, it works out like this:  a great boat that sails extraordinarily well will send a spark of enthusiasm thru sailors and non sailors alike!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Doug Lord said:

 gauchie- that is just silly-and an incredible distortion of the word "physics"!  What a simplistic, uninformed way to look at high performance monofoiler keelboat design. Nothing like a cat: the cat gets its RM from widely separated hulls-the NZAC(option 3) gets its maximum RM from the lift on its main foil--only TWO foils in the water vs 3 for the cat. In a pitchpole or knockdown NZAC will right itself-again, NOTHING LIKE A CAT!!!!!

"...relatable.." ,   "....alignment with the Every-Day-Sailor......" Once again, it works out like this:  a great boat that sails extraordinarily well will send a spark of enthusiasm thru sailors and non sailors alike!

You are absurd.  Your model is getting its RM from the leeward foil (effectively acting like the leeward hull or foil of a cat), a HUGE weighted wing (human ballast) that makes the boat just as, or nearly as wide as a multi, AND a pack of lead in the keel..... and the hull when in the water is going to have more wetted surface than the hull of a cat or tri with one in the water.  That boat would be more of a mess to deal with, logistically, than a cat, and just as alien to a typical mono-sailer.  I'm done with this convo.

Share this post


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

Actually, Doug, I'm not wrong.  If not for rules restricting multi-hulls, not one designer would opt for a mono-hull hauling lead, and all of these design ideas are efforts to replicate the righting moment naturally provided by a multihull.  It takes a rule restricting multi-hulls to force the designers into going with one big hull held upright by a big clump of lead.  That is not to say they can't come up with a fast design and have good racing, but the facts are the facts.

+1000 Gaucho, it's not worth arguing with Dougie. He´s clinched with TNZ, GV and his new drawings, and in a near future he will be posting his beloved motto NZAC first in the history of mankind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, nav said:

Don't get the whole "The AC50 couldn't hack it - so monos" talk ^

With half the effort they are putting into reinventing monos they could have taken the AC50 or a Mod 70 as a basis and then moved things around, added and subtracted until they got what they needed. The AC50 rule was totally restricted, put your foils here, only so deep, only so wide, only move them on these axes, no flaps, rudders like this, power and control restrictions etc.

Get rid of that nonsense and tell me you couldn't have a great AC multi and advance the art even further....of course you could, so don't waste your breath and claim that alone is the reason for the change.

+1000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jorge said:

+1000 Gaucho, it's not worth arguing with Dougie. He´s clinched with TNZ, GV and his new drawings, and in a near future he will be posting his beloved motto NZAC first in the history of mankind

Yep.  If they are bound and determined to go back to monohulls, they would probably be best off to go with Option 1 and just deal with that the performance will not be anywhere near as good without making absurd efforts to be like a cat, and instead simply try to make the racing the most compelling it can be even though WAY below the cats in performance.  I think that is a dumb idea, but it is probably way better than the other dumber ideas that are Options 2 and 3, both of which are just going to be inferior to cats/tris, and probably lead to inferior racing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, GauchoGreg said:
4 hours ago, HFC Hunter said:

^ It wasn't a binary decision like that. Etnz also wanted to bring the cup back to a vessel more aligned to the majority of sailors. Also didn't like the cost and logistics of full winged boats. Why not develop mono rather than soft sail heavy cats?

Have you any idea of what this new mono development is going to cost. When it's finished we can compare numbers. And you can tell me if the majority of sailors will be capable of sailing it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you start with the safety requirement of self-righting, but want to minimize the lead/mass required, you go as deep as possible (15 ft?) and keep the boat narrow.  Seems like you don't really need that much lead, just enough to lift the rig back out of the water.  If the rig only weighs 500 kgs (sails and rigging), but is 100+ ft tall with a COG 45 ft above water, then the lead only needs to be (45 / 15) * 500 kg = 1500 kg. 

Put racks on it, not wings (inverted stability, windage on its side etc.), and allow no lifting foils on the weather or downwind legs.  Maybe even define the hull shape to NOT plane (round sections aft).  Go to an old school WLWR-RW triangle course.  Displacement mode with sail changes and tacking / jibing duels for the first 2 legs.  

Allow lifting and righting moment (down force) foils on the two reaching legs...gidddy up!  Great spectacle and a wild ass jibe mark.

Finish to windward.

Why not?

Share this post


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

Hey - has DL posted a drawing of what he thinks the new boat might look like yet?!

:ph34r:

Are you nuts, man? Racked with ideas he is. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Le's face it; this proposed not-a-multihull AC (and the utter stupidity of the Lord of Fools rubbish is an example) is going to be either a plodding disaster (if they go backward but safe conventional) or maybe the best demolition display ever seen before in AC if they attempt the former.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm beginning to wonder if the windward and leeward legs will be short, and the reaching legs long ones back and forth, left and right, off Takapuna. That way you might still get these boats foiling nicely enough even if they aren't full-out-flying foiling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/1/2017 at 3:31 PM, Doug Lord said:

NZAC Sailplan ,Version One, Option 3 
Based on these calcu-guestimates:
A) At 90 degrees the force holding the boat there is 171,926 ft.lbs.
The force trying to right the boat is 483,800lb
1-keel weight 19782 lb @ 20'
2-buoyancy from pod-4608lb @20'

3- Wing mast 115' above deck

4-SA=3191 sq.ft./ CE 59' above center of lift of keel/foil combo
-----
-b Weights----
1) hull weight-8572 lb
2) keel weight 19782lb
3) rig weight 2915lb
4) crew weight 1900lb
5)TOTAL DISPL.= 33168 lb
-----
C) RM on Foils:
1) HM at 59' with 2.5lb/sq/ft. pressure= 470,672 ft.lb.
2) RM, boat slightly heeled, mast vertical=569,418 ft.lb.
-----
D) Foil Loading one main foil in the water supporting 80% of the load=
18' X 2.5' chord foil fully immersed=589lb/sq.ft.

E) Fully retractable main foils for lightest air sailing.

F) Upper third of main could possibly be designed as a solid sail with two panels. When the whole sail is reefed this section would slide down. Needs study but may be effective.

G) From my analysis the thing may need a canting keel-not for ultimate RM but to start out. Needs much more study. Probably has great potential IF the target weight is within about 6000lb  of the 31268lb total boat weight( for this first run) including keel.

NZAC SAILPLAN, version 1,  9-29-17 004.JPG

NZAC revised   9-7-17 003.JPG

NZAC ONE     9-25-17  dl 002 - Copy.JPG

Option 3: Fastest Monohull on the Planet

Share this post


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

+1

Dalton said the AC50 has problems in Auckland's rough water so he said you couldnt have a cup in Auckland with those boats.
its as simple as that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Sailabout said:

Dalton said the AC50 has problems in Auckland's rough water so he said you couldnt have a cup in Auckland with those boats.
its as simple as that.  Not to mention, there was no requirement to stay in AC50s without modifications, or add 10-20 feet and make other changes.

Yeah, because he would NEVER say something to give more reason for their change.....  I know all of you Kiwis think he is a perfect straight shooter, but come on!  It is not "as simple as that". Not to mention, they did not have to stick with AC50s without modification, or add 10-20'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

he could of said there is no money no sponsors no buyer interest in cats, he did mention its like 8% of yachts sold and hasnt changed for years

and Italians have zero interest in foiling cats

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/10/2017 at 0:59 PM, hoom said:

I should certainly hope so :blink:

 

Dougsboat copy.jpg

Some random crap in Bold: just because

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Option 3 Renders by Julian Bethwaite many moons ago:

billoch1.jpg

billoch2_jpg_sml.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Renders by Sean Langman many moons ago:

langman1_sml 2.jpg

langman3_sml 3.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol:  Yeah, those are SOOOOO different than a catamaran or trimaran!!!!  Fricking comical.  What a complicated mess that would be compared to a cat or tri.  I'm SURE those would be a reduction in design and construction costs, and obviously those are going back to tradition, like EB wanted.  Where the hell is the rolling-on-floor-laughing-ass-off emoticon when you need it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, GauchoGreg said:

:lol:  Yeah, those are SOOOOO different than a catamaran or trimaran!!!!  Fricking comical.  What a complicated mess that would be compared to a cat or tri.  I'm SURE those would be a reduction in design and construction costs, and obviously those are going back to tradition, like EB wanted.  Where the hell is the rolling-on-floor-laughing-ass-off emoticon when you need it?

Man , that ain't gona happen-you better weep now before the future shock sets in and leaves you even more dumbfounded........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why have a foiling monohull when it looks like a farking multihull? They look absolutely stupid. The foiling cats looked right and will always be faster. Really don't see these things as serving a purpose. They would be better off sailing Mini Maxi 72's

Share this post


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

Why have a foiling monohull when it looks like a farking multihull? They look absolutely stupid. The foiling cats looked right and will always be faster. Really don't see these things as serving a purpose. They would be better off sailing Mini Maxi 72's

Yep, and for all that effort, it would get its ass handed to it by a stock GC32 in all likelihood.  Brilliant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aren't these "pods" out the sides, the very definition of a multi-hull?

If my aunty had bollocks she'd be my uncle, and if my monohull had two pods out the side she'd be a trimaran.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, KoW said:

Aren't these "pods" out the sides, the very definition of a multi-hull?

If my aunty had bollocks she'd be my uncle, and if my monohull had two pods out the side she'd be a trimaran.

 

Those "pods" are just training wheels. When the match comes around, they are removed and all ya got is wings. Spectacular viewing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, KoW said:

Aren't these "pods" out the sides, the very definition of a multi-hull?

If my aunty had bollocks she'd be my uncle, and if my monohull had two pods out the side she'd be a trimaran.

 

No, it is a MonOhulL.  Obviously.  Ask Doug.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, KoW said:

Aren't these "pods" out the sides, the very definition of a multi-hull?

Objectively yes.

IMO that also includes the majority of foiling Moths but got a big spanking years ago when I tried to argue the point.

 

Likewise this thing which did the rounds about 10yrs back, claiming to be a breakthrough in monohull design

5086056.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, hoom said:

Objectively yes.

IMO that also includes the majority of foiling Moths but got a big spanking years ago when I tried to argue the point.

 

Likewise this thing which did the rounds about 10yrs back, claiming to be a breakthrough in monohull design

5086056.jpg

Nice thing about a design like that is the human ballast could have a fierce game of ping pong while sailing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GauchoGreg said:

Nice thing about a design like that is the human ballast could have a fierce game of ping pong while sailing.

+1000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, if they are coming around with this kind of crap, just because it's a monohull, i would prefer a zillion times to race the cup in J's

Share this post


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

Dalton said the AC50 has problems in Auckland's rough water so he said you couldnt have a cup in Auckland with those boats.
its as simple as that.

Yes, he says that after training for 2 ACs, one near successful, the other one successful. And after explaining us that it was better to train at home than in Bermudas.

And, if GD had to win a race in Hauraki gulf with any design, even in the worst conditions, would he choose a mono ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Tornado-Cat said:

Yes, he says that after training for 2 ACs, one near successful, the other one successful. And after explaining us that it was better to train at home than in Bermudas.

And, if GD had to win a race in Hauraki gulf with any design, even in the worst conditions, would he choose a mono ?

cant say but he did say you cant race in an AC50
I think he can see the race to sponsorship says go mono but an exciting one.

Share this post


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

Why have a foiling monohull when it looks like a farking multihull? They look absolutely stupid. The foiling cats looked right and will always be faster. Really don't see these things as serving a purpose. They would be better off sailing Mini Maxi 72's

That's what I'm thinking too. And that's probably option 1 along the design continuum.

DL's joke boats above will be at the option 3 end - if not already being built as tri's.

Share this post


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

Why not develop mono rather than soft sail heavy cats?

The only way to have mono lighter than cats is a central pods with foils wide enough tho get the same RM of a cat at,..... the expense of lateral stability, but would not it be a trimaran? and we know that if you optimize a trimaran you get a cat.

It is true though that with limited drag, fastest iceboats are mono pods on 3 skates.

Share this post


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

Objectively yes.

IMO that also includes the majority of foiling Moths but got a big spanking years ago when I tried to argue the point.

 

Likewise this thing which did the rounds about 10yrs back, claiming to be a breakthrough in monohull design

5086056.jpg

Look it's a baby KZ1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KZ1_(yacht)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Sailabout said:

cant say but he did say you cant race in an AC50
I think he can see the race to sponsorship says go mono but an exciting one.

My guess is that P$B was right when he spilled the beans.

Anyway, for the pleasure of speed, an old french built multi in your home waters and........ an aussie in the chopper (2014)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Boybland said:

Look it's a baby KZ1

Difference is KZ-1 legit didn't gain righting moment from putting the leeward wing in the water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems somewhat strange that GD is now saying that the AC winning Kiwi cat is/was considered unsuited for Hauraki Gulf waters ... after testing here for a number of months.

And also what about the big AC72s flying and surviving here in definitely harsh wind and sea conditions also out on the Gulf?

Suddenly that has volte face changed ... because of this Michael Mouse decision to step back to last Century to appease the old brigade?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Groucho Marx said:

Seems somewhat strange that GD is now saying that the AC winning Kiwi cat is/was considered unsuited for Hauraki Gulf waters ... after testing here for a number of months.

And also what about the big AC72s flying and surviving here in definitely harsh wind and sea conditions also out on the Gulf?

Suddenly that has volte face changed ... because of this Michael Mouse decision to step back to last Century to appease the old brigade?

They had the AC50 out in the Hauraki Gulf a couple of times but almost all of their testing was done behind the islands and in Tamaki Straight where it is protected from the heavy conditions.  ETNZ are eminently qualified to judge the suitability of the AC50's in the Hauraki Gulf and those who think they know better need a reality check.

The AC72 was designed to perform and tested in the Hauraki Gulf at the wind speed specified in the protocol before Oracle changed it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Terry Hollis said:

They had the AC50 out in the Hauraki Gulf a couple of times but almost all of their testing was done behind the islands and in Tamaki Straight where it is protected from the heavy conditions.  ETNZ are eminently qualified to judge the suitability of the AC50's in the Hauraki Gulf and those who think they know better need a reality check.

The AC72 was designed to perform and tested in the Hauraki Gulf at the wind speed specified in the protocol before Oracle changed it.

Bang on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wasn't always a cake ride in Bermuda either.

The AC50s, although not designed for hard conditions, did at times have to weather some crappy seas when winds were blowing directly and unhindered into the Sound. Also, we "experts" need to realize these things were hitting 40 knots speeds; you sailed at 40, or 30, or 20, better make that 10?

59dde3db1c32e_Bermudacopy.thumb.jpg.781f6db690194ffb39faa524613a9533.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this talk about what the AC50s can and can't do is stupid.  Fact of the matter, they could have easily designed a foiling cat that would be fine in the dreaded Hauraki Gulf (comical when you think of what foiling cats have been seen to handle).  The AC72s, even with massively over-built and unreefable wings, handled pretty extreme conditions in training for AC34, and if they designed a boat to handle seas, with reefable main, they could absolutely handle anything the Gulf would throw at them.  But if they want to go to monohulls, they could at least use legitimate arguments (even if not everyone agrees with them).  As far as I can tell, the only legitimate argument to go back to monohulls is to cater to some subjective idea that it is going back to tradition, or if they think more people will tune in because they can better relate to it.  But if that/those are the argument(s), they should NOT go Funky-Cool-Dougy-Fresh with a tripped out wanna-be multi-hull, and go to a simple monohull without foils, canting, or even racks/wings.... be "majestic", and see how the numbers turn out.  I'm not into "majestic" or nostagia, so I will probably lose all interest, but maybe I will be replaced by a whole bunch of sweater-vest-wearing club sailors dreaming of having their fat asses "sailing" on the boat (meaning serving as human ballast on the rails).

Share this post


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

All this talk about what the AC50s can and can't do is stupid.  Fact of the matter, they could have easily designed a foiling cat that would be fine in the dreaded Hauraki Gulf (comical when you think of what foiling cats have been seen to handle).  The AC72s, even with massively over-built and unreefable wings, handled pretty extreme conditions in training for AC34, and if they designed a boat to handle seas, with reefable main, they could absolutely handle anything the Gulf would throw at them.  But if they want to go to monohulls, they could at least use legitimate arguments (even if not everyone agrees with them).  As far as I can tell, the only legitimate argument to go back to monohulls is to cater to some subjective idea that it is going back to tradition, or if they think more people will tune in because they can better relate to it.  But if that/those are the argument(s), they should NOT go Funky-Cool-Dougy-Fresh with a tripped out wanna-be multi-hull, and go to a simple monohull without foils, canting, or even racks/wings.... be "majestic", and see how the numbers turn out.  I'm not into "majestic" or nostagia, so I will probably lose all interest, but maybe I will be replaced by a whole bunch of sweater-vest-wearing club sailors dreaming of having their fat asses "sailing" on the boat (meaning serving as human ballast on the rails).

Everyone knows that multi hulls can be built for the Hauraki Gulf but the reality is that the AC50's as used at Bermuda are not up to the job so ETNZ were faced with major modifications to the AC50 or come up with a new class of boat.

Personally I liked the AC62 cat but ETNZ have chosen a mono so get over it.

Share this post


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

Everyone knows that multi hulls can be built for the Hauraki Gulf but the reality is that the AC50's as used at Bermuda are not up to the job so ETNZ were faced with major modifications to the AC50 or come up with a new class of boat.

Personally I liked the AC62 cat but ETNZ have chosen a mono so get over it.

Ah, ah, amazing how some can change their discourse in a few months.

I am sure these guys did not know what they were talking about a few months ago. :)

"After 21 days of sailing in the Hauraki Gulf, Emirates Team New Zealand has lowered its bold red wing sail....
The sailing conditions in Auckland have been ideal for testing and putting the race boat throughout the range of conditions it will race in once in Bermuda....."
"The conditions have almost been more ‘Bermuda-like’ than in Bermuda.” said Skipper Glenn Ashby. “We have probably been the team that has had the chance to sail more days on their America’s Cup Class catamaran than anyone to date as the weather at this time of year in Auckland is perfect for sailing"

 

 

 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites