pacice

Foiling Monohull - what would it look like?

Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, jorge said:

+1 but not sure we agree on which two

Plenty of match racing in AC35 so no reason we won't see good racing again.

Trickle down certainly. The AC has a habit of normalising technology and it's bound to accelerate the kind of know how seen on the Figaro 3 and Infinity 46 etc.

Share this post


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

I don't care what "they" called it, the point remains the same.... that is completely counter to the idea of a monohull..... that boat has its righting moment created by extremely wide set points of bouyancy (foils in that case, rather than displacement, but the effect is the same) away from the central hull.  This is nothing like what anyone thinks of as a monohull, and yet that is what they are trying to call it (well, that is if anyone making real decisions is on the same playing field as Doug Lord... God help us). 

The point, again, is that the it is a stupid set of handicaps without the benefits, all to call it a "monohull".  As I said, better that they DON'T go for the kind of performance only possible for a boat that is effectively a multi-hull if they want to call it a monohull, and be true to what their motivations are.... go with a monohull with just 2 appendages, non-canting, but otherwise a pretty open box and see what they can come up with and not worry that it won't be as fast as a multi.

I would prefer a totally open box (max beam, max length, max sail area) and let people go with as many hulls as they like... but that aint happening.

So Peter de Savary and Team Blue Arrow don't know their ass from a hole in the ground but you do, right? You're so very , very wrong. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

See- http://www.americas-cup-history.at/english/blue.htm

Peter de Savary reached the LVC Challenger Final in 1983 with his self-financed Victory 83 campaign but lost then against Australia II. At the AC 1987 he did not take part but placed a challenge for the next Cup with an outstanding monohull. This was the hydrofoil-stabilized "Blue Arrow".It was about the size of Conner's catamaran Stars & Stripes, but had a single hull that was as narrow as a canoe.  It was launched officially on 20th July 1988, 90 days after the start of design.

 

Share this post


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

So Peter DeSavory and Team Blue Arrow don't know their ass from a hole in the ground but you do, right? You're so very , very wrong. 

No, you are a tool, Doug, a tool with no ability to understand a point. They are not the ones with a problem, you are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't encourage/quote the lunatic - he takes it as a complement and any publicity is good publicity for his monstrous but delusional ego. And ffs keep New Zealand's name out of your Michael Mouse weirdo creations. You are a joke in this country.

Back to reality from the abyss of insanity:

If you look closely Blue Arrow has a swelling in the upper sections of the foil, not much but it is there. You know any other foilers with a fattened top?

So although small in area it is still a "float?" And that makes the craft a trimaran.

However a not very stable one, hence its demise.

Here is another multihull with minimal float buoyancy - Neither Fish nor Fowl.

NF2.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frog man--why did they do this if it was a trimaran:

http://www.americas-cup-history.at/english/blue.htm

"This meant the vessel had to be under way to generate any appreciable righting moment.At the low speeds, large inflatable floats were placed under the crossbeam by the support crew (for docking, etc)."

------------------------

Just for the record NZAC is a monofoiler............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NZAC’? Sweet name!

Do you maybe have a diagram of NZAC you’d be willing to post and share here? 

Oh, and a another little question for you: It is a Match-racing monohull, right? That’s what the AC75 is gonna be, so just curious your educated insights into the subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Delusional one,  Tabarly also put buoyancy under trimaran foiler Paul Ricard when the boat was moored because in those experimental days of 1979, low buoyancy floats were still unknown territory. Also the wing mast was heavy. And anyway, your point regarding Blue Arrow the trimaran foiler is?

A fact you may not know, having played only around with your bath toys, full size foiling boats require movement for the foils to provide lift. Thought you might have known this.

Share this post


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

NZAC’? Sweet name!

Do you maybe have a diagram of NZAC you’d be willing to post and share here? 

Oh, and a another little question for you: It is a Match-racing monohull, right? That’s what the AC75 is gonna be, so just curious your educated insights into the subject.

Gettin in the swing of things ,eh stingray? 

Share this post


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

Gettin in the swing of things ,eh stingray? 

Me? Lol

Was just curious if with your NZAC you enjoy swinging one, two, or three ways.

Bernasconi could surprise us too, he does seem pretty open-minded.. you never know with these things! (GD joked about a similar thing in the podcast, it’s just humor)

Nov 15 could be good, by Nov 30 definitely, sure feels like a forever-long anticipation. 

Share this post


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

Tabarly also put buoyancy under trimaran foiler Paul Ricard when the boat was moored because in those experimental days of 1979, low buoyancy floats were still unknown territory.

Paul Ricard has never been able to fly because the technology was not there at the time, it was much too heavy.

However the first tests were made with a mono hull of Tornado. It was the ancestor of the Hydroptere.

 

hydrop-et-livre-transat-en-double-1979-ed-du-pen-duick.jpg

Share this post


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

How will the new flying monohull look like ? And that is a mono.post-57849-0-18474000-1481400153.jpg.f6cb1cc8c8076d2aab4eb6ecfb31c3fb.jpg

Nice, TC. Was almost going to try to find that exact same photo.

Those ladder foils are actually very clever for their time, cool history. 

ANZAC HERE WE COME! :)

Share this post


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

Nice, TC. Was almost going to try to find that exact same photo.

Those ladder foils are actually very clever for their time, cool history. 

ANZAC HERE WE COME! :)

^^  What about this one, from Tanton design yachts if I am right. Not sure if they are froggies.

I think I found MY mono with an L foil !

 

 

FoilerA-OR9-13.jpg

Share this post


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

Yeah.... sounds like a really affordable concept.   And really similar to what every-day-Joe sailor rounds the cans in [dripping sarcasm].

I was going to mention that but wanted to keep the post simple, not make it too intellectually expensive to grok ;)

 

8 hours ago, nav said:

The fall back in this case, literally, would be to archimedian mode - and you could design for that only if you wanted, no one is forcing you to fly...maybe

Not if its 75' long and has very little lead.

Share this post


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

Paul Ricard has never been able to fly because the technology was not there at the time, it was much too heavy.

However the first tests were made with a mono hull of Tornado. It was the ancestor of the Hydroptere.

 

hydrop-et-livre-transat-en-double-1979-ed-du-pen-duick.jpg

Ah. Another one of Doug's foiling monos. No wait....

Share this post


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

And now, don't blame me, I know I already posted that in another thread, but it has its place here !

http://www.voilesetvoiliers.com/course-regate/architecture-navale-les-projets-futuristes-de-murnikov/

 

7b4958bfa12d954dcd1e67e925a4bfe7.jpg

 

 

Good chance by what folks have been suggesting so far.

Radical! I could look forward to boats like that crazy of a mof*cker 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But will it work?

Their smaller proof of concept model didn't seem to work very well.

Pretty sure it capsized rather ignominously & they refocussed on a winged dinghy instead.

 

Worse, that concept would require a large motor running.

Share this post


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

But will it work?

Their smaller proof of concept model didn't seem to work very well.

Pretty sure it capsized rather ignominously & they refocussed on a winged dinghy instead.

To make it short, stability thanks to the keel.

"Elles découlent d’une longue recherche que nous avons appelée : la «forme mince stable» («Slender Stable Form»). Longue et étroite, il faut tout de même que l’énorme stabilité apportée par la «quille volante» ne pose pas de problème en cas de mauvais fonctionnement ou d’erreur de l’équipage. Quand on place trois équipiers au rappel dans les filières d’un monocoque moderne, le gain est conséquent ! Le même déplacement sur un SpeedDream 27 n’a quasiment aucun effet… Parce que la largeur à la flottaison est beaucoup plus faible que sur n’importe quel autre bateau : elle est de seulement 0,9 mètre (3 pieds) et elle diminue avec la vitesse ! Le ratio longueur à la flottaison/largeur à la flottaison est de 9:1, quasiment comme un multicoque…"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, hoom said:

But will it work?

Their smaller proof of concept model didn't seem to work very well.

Pretty sure it capsized rather ignominously & they refocussed on a winged dinghy instead.

 

Worse, that concept would require a large motor running.

Well, obviously they need to contract Doug Lord to nail down the concept.

Share this post


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

Well, obviously they need to contract Doug Lord to nail down the concept.

I'll second that motion!!

Share this post


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

I'll second that motion!!

Are you saying DL = (bowel) motion? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/11/2017 at 12:43 AM, dogwatch said:

Enquiring minds wonder, when your turds bother you with questions, what do they ask about?

They usually ask, "what is the meaning of life?".... but I doubt they hear my response as I push the flush handle....

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Clean is right it should be low displacement. Wide, flat hull IMO. Mega Skiff type? Canting rig? Sliding ballast? who knows. But it would be the only way to make a 75 ft. monohull fast or fly

Share this post


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

If Clean is right it should be low displacement. Wide, flat hull IMO. Mega Skiff type? Canting rig? Sliding ballast? who knows. But it would be the only way to make a 75 ft. monohull fast or fly

You mean 'fast' in relative terms?

To me a TP52 is fast for a mono. It's all relative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/21/2017 at 2:20 PM, Basiliscus said:

Neither of Chevalier and Taglang's boats are suitable for close-quarters match racing because the foils extend outside the beam of the hulls.  The boat has to be able to sideswipe another boat without hooking the foils or the shrouds.  For example, the AC50 Design Rule limited how much the retracted foils could extend outside the beam so they couldn't hook another boat's shrouds.  I think you'd need to have a similar kind of envelope for the foils on the new monohull. I don't see Dali or DSS foils fitting into that envelope.

To get the power to foil, you need righting moment, and that means putting the foils out wide, whether it's a multihull or a monohull.  You can draw the rig and foils flying independently, then draw the boat that encloses the foils and mast step.  I think a more suitable approach would be put L foils on 

You're saying something like this then ?

 

AC Monohull.JPG

Share this post


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

You're saying something like this then ?

 

AC Monohull.JPG

Obviously the best suited to give you the answer is basiliscus.

However I have two interpretation of what he writes.

"I think a more suitable approach would be put L foils on something like a 75' KZ1 with wider wings - a scaled up version of Mark Pivac's Moth that Brett Burville sailed (and was subsequently classified as a multihull)."

First is yours

Second, for a lighter boat would be this:

- a moth with wing

- a mono with wings

- Doug' sketch is not from that either

burvill_1_article.jpg.5fa6164f7979966383d41f24c2046afe.jpgnew-zealand-popular-sciences-sept-1988-photo-dan-nerney-1988.jpg.196f1752794773a406eea5dc4d7f9d1c.jpg

Share this post


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

You're saying something like this then ?

 

AC Monohull.JPG

HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/24/2017 at 10:05 AM, Tornado-Cat said:

And now, don't blame me, I know I already posted that in another thread, but it has its place here !

http://www.voilesetvoiliers.com/course-regate/architecture-navale-les-projets-futuristes-de-murnikov/

Quite similar to stuff that was posted early in this thread (harking back to 2007): http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/?app=core&module=system&controller=content&do=find&content_class=forums_Topic&content_id=193176&content_commentid=5921494

1 hour ago, Monofoiler said:

You're saying something like this then ?

 

Yep. Exaggerate the foil cant or add a light canting keel and it doesn't need to be so beamy.

Share this post


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

Mark Pivac's Moth that Brett Burville sailed (and was subsequently classified as a multihull)."

burvill_1_article.jpg

Man I remember first time I saw that & being so excited :wub:

Was a '97 Aussie sailing mag I think? I recall it had a throw away line about the AC maybe being sailed in giant foiling Moths in 20yrs...

Share this post


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

You're saying something like this then ?

 

AC Monohull.JPG

Depending on the definition of "monohull", it might take something like that.  This Moth was judged to be a multihull because it pierced the water in 3 places:

2000-Burvilles-Windrush.jpg

Being a former M16 owner, I think a 75 ft scow would be awesome.  Think 2X A-scow. With foils!  Call it Lawson's Revenge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Burville's moth:  Photo was from 2000 Moth Worlds in Perth where it won 2 of the 12? races.  The class rules long before banned "sailing as a multihull" and also specified that no longitudinal airgap exist under the boat while floating in the water. The boat got past a local measurer for the event. Subsequent class discussion decided that the foils must exit the hull below the static waterline to satisfy both rules.

Although it was never further developed, the boat was way slower than the T foil boats from only a year or two later. Todays moths would be 50% faster both upwind and downwind. No one now lets the sail out that far, the apparent wind does not go that far aft. 

Multihull and AC designers persevere with similar configurations with continued poor control and dubious speed advantages compared to the tiny moths. But converting the moth T foil concept to  a bigger boat seems unlikely due to happen due to lateral control issues and the consequences of a capsize.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite what the traditionalists would make of the Americas Cup being sailed in a dinghy lord only knows

Share this post


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

You mean 'fast' in relative terms?

To me a TP52 is fast for a mono. It's all relative.

Right, I mean faster  than an existing monohull

Share this post


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

Photo was from 2000 Moth Worlds

I defer to your better knowledge, surprised it was that late :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Monofoiler said:

You're saying something like this then ?

 

AC Monohull.JPG

 

Very seaworthy. Would easily handle anything the Hauraki Gulf might throw at her. Dalts would be pleased

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Phil S said:

 The class rules long before banned "sailing as a multihull" .... But converting the moth T foil concept to  a bigger boat seems unlikely due to happen due to lateral control issues and the consequences of a capsize.

Sad, it could have been interesting to compare the evolution of performance of both concepts.

The definition of mono or multi won't happen this time, Defender/CoR make the rules and can decide what they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Xlot said:

Very seaworthy. Would easily handle anything the Hauraki Gulf might throw at her. Dalts would be pleased

The IMOCA 60s have a beam that is 70% of an AC50, and they are very seaworthy. It doesn't take much additional beam plus some outward cant to get very close to, or better than, the same "foil base".

Share this post


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

The IMOCA 60s have a beam that is 70% of an AC50, and they are very seaworthy. It doesn't take much additional beam plus some outward cant to get very close to, or better than, the same "foil base".

Yes, wings, at the expense of extra weight. Not competitive against a multi, or a central pod with foils, which would be determined a multi. And, as you know, P$B imposed a mono.

Share this post


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

Yes, wings, at the expense of extra weight. Not competitive against a multi, or a central pod with foils, which would be determined a multi. And, as you know, P$B imposed a mono.

Yep, and where all of these designs (yes, even DouG's) look to be particularly problematic is in match racing.  They may do well on a reach, or downwind, they may be fine for an open water race, but these will all be penalized heavily in tacks compared to foiling cats without the "monohull" nomenclature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree: I think NZAC, particularly with "Q" foils would tack on a dime and be able to match race very well. She'd probably be faster with the UptiP foils but might not maneuver as well as she would with "Q" foils.

Q foils:

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

 

UptiP Foils:

NZAC Version Two Foils (TC) 002.JPG

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, moronic one, keep posting ad-nauseum your sub-teenage doodles.

And quit linking New Zealand to your childish rubbish.

 

Share this post


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

Yes, moronic one, keep posting ad-nauseum your sub-teenage doodles.

And quit linking New Zealand to your childish rubbish.

 

LOL! I notice UpTip foils have made a comeback. All Purpose foils will be next!

#SometimesYouJustNeedToAcceptThatYouAreSenile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AllPurpose© uPTiP® CBTF®© PeoplesFoils

 

Quote

Dougsboat copy.jpg

In Bold just because

Share this post


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

Yes, moronic one, keep posting ad-nauseum your sub-teenage doodles.

 

Ahem, @ you and Clean: it's ad (no hyphen) nauseam

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ~Stingray~ said:

Mono? Cat?? Tri???

 

That looks like Karapiro!

Share this post


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

That looks like Karapiro!

I believe these are a kiwi invention - battery assisted but :-/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the last "voiles et voiliers"(French sailing magazine), they say that the AC75 will be 18m wide (foils extended), keel less, and with a weight of 5 tons!, is this info more or less official ? Does it appear somewhere else ?

 

ac75.jpeg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the correction Xlot but ... "It’s possible that ad nauseum will eventually be accepted as standard — English is not Latin, after all — but for now I advise the use of the standard spelling ad nauseam."

I still feel very nauseous reading the Lord of foils/fools nauseous horse defecation.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

Thanks for the correction Xlot but ... "It’s possible that ad nauseum will eventually be accepted as standard — English is not Latin, after all — but for now I advise the use of the standard spelling ad nauseam."

I still feel very nauseous reading the Lord of foils/fools nauseous horse defecation.

I will thank you not to cast aspersions about horse defecation. What has it ever done to you?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

Thanks for the correction Xlot but ... "It’s possible that ad nauseum will eventually be accepted as standard — English is not Latin, after all — but for now I advise the use of the standard spelling ad nauseam."

Alternatively, this might be considered for inclusion in SAAC's list of proprietary witticisms, such as "your elk" and "splitting hares". Submit the application to Rennmaus :)

 

  • Like 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

Alternatively, this might be considered for inclusion in SAAC's list of proprietary witticisms, such as "elk" and "splitting hares". Submit the application to Rennmaus :)

 

Thanks for making me a steakholder. Application accepted automatically, although I'd prefer "at museum".

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

  ^ :D:D That's what I call silly season with style, Rennie. Except I was bowled over by yl75's post above: an 18 m wide monster, the Voiles et Voiliers compères get the top prize!

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like beamy trimaran. No keel? Can be done - there has been instances of idiot charters running around and leaving the keel behind and somehow no one notices. Just build that momentum slowly and don't get caught over canvassed at too low of a speed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Intriguing, & Kind of lets the air out of a joke post I was going to make about miss-reading the class name, which went: it's a 75' BEAM.

Share this post


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

 

Ignore this, I just figured out how the quote button works, now that I think about it I have never used one on any forum. (Imagine I'll get a down vote for this, I'll get a drink ready just in case).

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


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

Ignore this, I just figured out how the quote button works, now that I think about it I have never used one on any forum. (Imagine I'll get a down vote for this, I'll get a drink ready just in case).

You're welcome ;)

Share this post


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

 

  ^ :D:D That's what I call silly season with style, Rennie. Except I was bowled over by yl75's post above: an 18 m wide monster, the Voiles et Voiliers compères get the top prize!

 

Terra NZACtle?

Share this post


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

Wow ! :)

By the way, I don't see how such a boat couldn't make tacking more costly (in terms of distance lost) compared to the foiling cats, so I don't see how the races could be more interesting than with the ac50 (which I think were great)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, yl75 said:

Wow ! :)

By the way, I don't see how such a boat couldn't make tacking more costly (in terms of distance lost) compared to the foiling cats, so I don't see how the races could be more interesting than with the ac50 (which I think were great)

Well I agree that making tacking more costly would make the racing worse but sure as shit don't think the Bermuda racing was great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, yl75 said:

In the last "voiles et voiliers"(French sailing magazine), they say that the AC75 will be 18m wide (foils extended), keel less, and with a weight of 5 tons!, is this info more or less official ? Does it appear somewhere else ?

 

 

=====================

Thanks for that yl75: looks like we might have an exciting breakthru monofoiler design afterall. Just fantastic!

NZAC minus the keel----wow!

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

Well I agree that making tacking more costly would make the racing worse but sure as shit don't think the Bermuda racing was great.

One of many, many great racing moves - across many great races

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, so if it is a monohull, with a max box width of 18m. That means that the 1 hull has to have no convexity (can't be an 'attached' catamaran) and the max foil width when both extended is 18M.   Hmm,

if the foils go off a hiking rack is that 'a trimaran' even though the racks are not designed to touch water?

I can't imagine a world where a skinny main hull would even accommodate 18 (or 2x9) M foils, but wow what a box to play in - particularly with the consideration of what the Hauraki gulf can throw at you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Loose Cannon said:

OK, so if it is a monohull, with a max box width of 18m. That means that the 1 hull has to have no convexity (can't be an 'attached' catamaran) and the max foil width when both extended is 18M.   Hmm,

if the foils go off a hiking rack is that 'a trimaran' even though the racks are not designed to touch water?

I can't imagine a world where a skinny main hull would even accommodate 18 (or 2x9) M foils, but wow what a box to play in - particularly with the consideration of what the Hauraki gulf can throw at you.

Pure speculation in that article imo but entertaining it just for fun:

Maybe a ‘scow’ like hull, a bit like that crazy Mini Transat boat I saw somewhere, the one with telescoping everythings including even the wing?

If it is indeed going to be that radical then it could get close to the speeds that AC50s were hitting. But foiling tacks?? That’s pretty hard to imagine being able to replicate!

Can’t wait to see what size rig this beast will have.

Share this post


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

Pure speculation in that article imo but entertaining it just for fun:

Maybe a ‘scow’ like hull, a bit like that crazy Mini Transat boat I saw somewhere, the one with telescoping everythings including even the wing?

If it is indeed going to be that radical then it could get close to the speeds that AC50s were hitting. But foiling tacks?? That’s pretty hard to imagine being able to replicate!

Agreed, I think there could be some wild downwind legs, but don’t expect much upwind foiling if it is not a ‘monomaran’ 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Loose Cannon said:

Agreed, I think there could be some wild downwind legs, but don’t expect much upwind foiling if it is not a ‘monomaran’ 

Good one. I also like ‘moran’ :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, yl75 said:

In the last "voiles et voiliers"(French sailing magazine), they say that the AC75 will be 18m wide (foils extended), keel less, and with a weight of 5 tons!, is this info more or less official ? Does it appear somewhere else ?

 

ac75.jpeg

People would now it by now if V&V was a trustable source... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/26/2017 at 3:07 PM, Doug Lord said:

I disagree: I think NZAC, particularly with "Q" foils would tack on a dime and be able to match race very well. She'd probably be faster with the UptiP foils but might not maneuver as well as she would with "Q" foils.

Q foils:   ( each foil is 24'(7m) outside the boat and another 3' inside )

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

 

 

 

I think the hull would have to be wider with zero ballast-unless they use sliding on-deck ballast with a very quick system. NZAC was conceived of as a self-righting boat with 19,000lb of ballast-take that away and she would simply roll over.

The foils are 7m each side......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Even above-water sliding ballast would mean using anti-anti-gravity defying lead... 

The only way this ‘gigantesque foils’ design concept makes any sense is if it’s a beast, a full-out flyer, in which case every single ounce matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only reason to go monohull is to have something that works in non foiling conditions. And if it's non foiling without keel, a stupidly wide hull or some removable on board ballast is needed

19 minutes ago, ~Stingray~ said:

^ Even above-water sliding ballast would mean using anti-anti-gravity defying lead... 

The only way this ‘gigantesque foils’ design concept makes any sense is if it’s a beast, a full-out flyer, in which case every single ounce matters.

Edited by jonas a
Screwed up

Share this post


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

pteranodon-bird-flying-above-ocean--5943

Dual wing sails are definitely outside the Rule. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites