storosis

North Helix Sails vs regular Code zero

Recommended Posts

I am considering to make a new code zero as now in ORC is allowed to have asymmetric on center line and symmetric on pole.

North now marketing the Helix Sails, is any real difference between them and a regular Code 0.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Storosis- I've designed for North Sails and seen the new Helix sails.   I'm currently developing the Quantum XC Cableless A0's.  Drop me an e-mail and I can discuss the pros and cons with you.  For sure Cableless is the way to go, I was initially skeptical, but after racing with these sails I am more than convinced these sails are revolutionary.

cwilliams at quantumsails dot com

 

 

Share this post


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

Hi Storosis- I've designed for North Sails and seen the new Helix sails.   I'm currently developing the Quantum XC Cableless A0's.  Drop me an e-mail and I can discuss the pros and cons with you.  For sure Cableless is the way to go, I was initially skeptical, but after racing with these sails I am more than convinced these sails are revolutionary.

cwilliams at quantumsails dot com

 

 

there are certain rules   that occur here...

1) fuck off and post a pic of your wife / girlfriends /SO's   tits

2)  buy an ad 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I attended a North Sails design meeting recently and there was a 30 minute discussion/presentation of the Helix sails. The helix luff can be built into a 3di A0 where you see the biggest benefits of the technology but they will also build a more conventional panneled A0 but cable free. A slightly different sail but we have arriving at some point this spring a cable free spinnaker staysail built in a panel construction. If the A0 you need still has to measure as a spinnaker then it’s a no brainier, the sail should be faster and kinder to the boat because you don’t have the same loads through the luff. What it isn’t however is a true upwind sail you’ll still struggle to get proper upwind angles that some people sometimes think they can get from their A0s

p.s I don’t work for North Sails

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Grande Mastere Dreade said:

there are certain rules   that occur here...

1) fuck off and post a pic of your wife / girlfriends /SO's   tits

2)  buy an ad 

Thats not exactly how it works.

 

Fuck off. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Chris Q said:

Hi Storosis- I've designed for North Sails and seen the new Helix sails.   I'm currently developing the Quantum XC Cableless A0's.  Drop me an e-mail and I can discuss the pros and cons with you.  For sure Cableless is the way to go, I was initially skeptical, but after racing with these sails I am more than convinced these sails are revolutionary.

cwilliams at quantumsails dot com

 

 

Soooo why can't you discuss the pros and cons here??

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd sort of like to hear some discussion on AO sails and , pros / cons, and cable less options.

I can google tits anytime.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/26/2019 at 12:27 PM, storosis said:

I am considering to make a new code zero as now in ORC is allowed to have asymmetric on center line and symmetric on pole.

North now marketing the Helix Sails, is any real difference between them and a regular Code 0.

 

I think that you really need to define what it is you want the sail to do. It sounds like you normally use symmetric spinnakers and want a code zero to fill in as a reaching sail. If so the cableless sail will probably work.

 
If you want a windward component I am skeptical that a cableless  code zero will be able develop enough luff tension  to go to windward at all.
 
I have two code zeros. Both have a low stretch luff rope that minimizes luff sag. The first is from North when I built the boat in 2000. It is a light air weapon. With it I can sail to 30 apparent with a true wind angle of 65 -70, so not a windward sail. At 7 knots true I am getting overpowered and need to bear off a little. This sail now has a anti-torsion luff rope and furler and gets a lot more use.
 
The second is from a local sail maker, Kevin Farrar. A small, flat, light wind code zero designed to be a windward sail, I can carry it at 25 -30 apparent with a true wind angle of 55 -60. Not as good as a genoa but it does not carry a punitive penalty. After the experience with the first code zero I made sure that the new one had an anti torsion rope and furler. The tack line is 3 to 1 at the furler and leads to a winch, so serious luff tension. 
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, sailorman44 said:

I think that you really need to define what it is you want the sail to do. It sounds like you normally use symmetric spinnakers and want a code zero to fill in as a reaching sail. If so the cableless sail will probably work.

 
If you want a windward component I am skeptical that a cableless  code zero will be able develop enough luff tension  to go to windward at all.
 
I have two code zeros. Both have a low stretch luff rope that minimizes luff sag. The first is from North when I built the boat in 2000. It is a light air weapon. With it I can sail to 30 apparent with a true wind angle of 65 -70, so not a windward sail. At 7 knots true I am getting overpowered and need to bear off a little. This sail now has a anti-torsion luff rope and furler and gets a lot more use.
 
The second is from a local sail maker, Kevin Farrar. A small, flat, light wind code zero designed to be a windward sail, I can carry it at 25 -30 apparent with a true wind angle of 55 -60. Not as good as a genoa but it does not carry a punitive penalty. After the experience with the first code zero I made sure that the new one had an anti torsion rope and furler. The tack line is 3 to 1 at the furler and leads to a winch, so serious luff tension. 

In order to clear it up my intention is not to replace any upwind sail, the idea is to have a sail for use in close reaching (from 50 to 75 TWA) and replace the symmetrical reacher .
I know that any normal code zero will fit the purpose but a code zero with cable is better on tight angles and one with luff rope is working better on wider angles.
The fact that we have a limitation on spinnakers to 3 make the equation little difficult because you need a sail to be legal as spinnaker working good on light wind (4-8) on angles 50-65 and keep working without the leach be flogging up to 90 TWA in moderate conditions (10-14). 

Presently the inventory consisted from a S1 (Contender 0.5), S2 (AirX700) and S3 (AirX-900) and the reacher works good from 75-80 TWA and on, but in general symmetrical and tight reaching does not goes together

Share this post


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

In order to clear it up my intention is not to replace any upwind sail, the idea is to have a sail for use in close reaching (from 50 to 75 TWA) and replace the symmetrical reacher .
I know that any normal code zero will fit the purpose but a code zero with cable is better on tight angles and one with luff rope is working better on wider angles.
The fact that we have a limitation on spinnakers to 3 make the equation little difficult because you need a sail to be legal as spinnaker working good on light wind (4-8) on angles 50-65 and keep working without the leach be flogging up to 90 TWA in moderate conditions (10-14). 

 It is going to be difficult for any normal code zero to achieve those kind of performance numbers. 50 to 75 AWA yes, TWA not so much. My small code zero does it but it took considerable tweaking to get it to perform that well. It does perform without flogging at 90 TWA (about 60-65 AWA) but at that point has lost much of it's punch and I am better off with the old code zero or the code 1. Also it is a light air sail and I try not to push it to it's structural limits

I too would like to hear from Chris Q on code zero developments at Quantum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/27/2019 at 12:01 PM, solosailor said:

Wrong, that's been the greeting here forever.

You're wrong too. Fucking dimwits. 

This was not his first post. 

 

I for one would like to hear the differences in the new tech. If you need help googling tits, I'll be happy to pm you a walkthrough on how to do just that. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any A0 designed to measure as a spinnaker will always battle physics when making them sail upwind. The cable less sail doesn’t need the same luff tension as a cabled sail because it relies on the elliptical projection of the luff to hold itself on the centre line of the boat rather than sticking 2T on the luff cable for any typical 36-40ft racer. The cable free sail aims to push the 75% mid girth “baggage” material forward towards the luff and removes it from the leech where it usually ends up flapping and causing excessive drag. The cable free sail should be a more efficient sail, be cheaper (no cost for the cable) and lighter (again no cable) but for pointing high any A0 probably won’t cut it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bodega87 said:

You're wrong too. Fucking dimwits. 

This was not his first post. 

 

I for one would like to hear the differences in the new tech. If you need help googling tits, I'll be happy to pm you a walkthrough on how to do just that. 

 

Can't we have both?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JL92S said:

Any A0 designed to measure as a spinnaker will always battle physics when making them sail upwind. The cable less sail doesn’t need the same luff tension as a cabled sail because it relies on the elliptical projection of the luff to hold itself on the centre line of the boat rather than sticking 2T on the luff cable for any typical 36-40ft racer. The cable free sail aims to push the 75% mid girth “baggage” material forward towards the luff and removes it from the leech where it usually ends up flapping and causing excessive drag. The cable free sail should be a more efficient sail, be cheaper (no cost for the cable) and lighter (again no cable) but for pointing high any A0 probably won’t cut it...

What kind of TWA performance can you expect from a cable less code zero? Reducing rig tension is to be desired and my code zeros require a lot of tension, unless it I can bear off.

Share this post


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

For what it’s worth the entry angle implications of not having tons of halyard tension is not to be discounted. 

 As most J24 sailors know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, sailorman44 said:

What kind of TWA performance can you expect from a cable less code zero? Reducing rig tension is to be desired and my code zeros require a lot of tension, unless it I can bear off.

Roughly the same as with a cabled sail and it is limited on AWA. In super light airs on a light fast boat you might not get as high as you expect because you drag your apparent forward too far. Also a boat with a longer bowsprit might have a more favourable sheeting angle. But in the right conditions with the right boat you might get up to 70° but you’d be looking at the same angle for a conventional A0 too. Only the cableless sail should be faster and use less helm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, JL92S said:

Roughly the same as with a cabled sail and it is limited on AWA. In super light airs on a light fast boat you might not get as high as you expect because you drag your apparent forward too far. Also a boat with a longer bowsprit might have a more favourable sheeting angle. But in the right conditions with the right boat you might get up to 70° but you’d be looking at the same angle for a conventional A0 too. Only the cableless sail should be faster and use less helm

What are you basing this on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At Seattle boat show and spoke with a Doyle rep (I think, he was in the booth but not branded) there, he mentioned that Comanche had a cable less jib for the start of the Sydney Hobart.  They weren't going well in the early part of the race while they were getting out of the harbor when it was light but I think that is more a function of how slow that boat is in light air, when they had a touch of pressure they were with everyone just fine and when they cracked off a little after the first mark they took off, not sure what AWA was but if it was just off of close hauled and it worked ok in light, might be a good idea.  The rep also said they've been doing staysails that way.  He also mentioned that they're producing the sails in paneled configuration for boats under 50'(?), price wise designed to serve the masses.  Seems like the Kiwis are working hard to expand the application.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, jackolantern said:

What are you basing this on?

A discussion with the head of design and also head of Helix design at North and experiences with our own Cabled A0 

Share this post


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

At Seattle boat show and spoke with a Doyle rep (I think, he was in the booth but not branded) there, he mentioned that Comanche had a cable less jib for the start of the Sydney Hobart.  They weren't going well in the early part of the race while they were getting out of the harbor when it was light but I think that is more a function of how slow that boat is in light air, when they had a touch of pressure they were with everyone just fine and when they cracked off a little after the first mark they took off, not sure what AWA was but if it was just off of close hauled and it worked ok in light, might be a good idea.  The rep also said they've been doing staysails that way.  He also mentioned that they're producing the sails in paneled configuration for boats under 50'(?), price wise designed to serve the masses.  Seems like the Kiwis are working hard to expand the application.

They’re not the only ones, the J99 sailing in the UK already has a cable less panelled A0 from north sails and our new spinnaker staysail for our sunfast 3600 from North will be cable free

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AO sails have their place but so do big overlapping genoas, Depending on rating. And not fashionable at all but the wind doesn't know, shhhh. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, jackolantern said:

Not fashionable from the perspective of rating agencies*

Right. PHRF wants a big penalty if I get a 150% genoa but a Code Zero measures in as a spinnaker. It doesn't go to weather like a genoa but it is better than a 95% jib in light air.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talked to the local North loft but they didn't know anything about Helix. Googled it and all I could find from North was hype and BS. Had some nice some nice video of a TP52. They had an interesting graphic showing the TWA/TWS trade off for what they are now calling code sails. The sails that have a windward component are called code 55 and don't measure in as a code zero because the mid girth is less than 75%.. What good are they if you can't legally use them. PHRF would charge a 100 sec per mile penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/28/2019 at 9:44 PM, sailorman44 said:

What kind of TWA performance can you expect from a cable less code zero? Reducing rig tension is to be desired and my code zeros require a lot of tension, unless it I can bear off.

Sail makers don't really concern themselves with TWA, but rather AWA as that is actually what's going on with their sail. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This shape is working for my boat up to 7-8 knots "upwind". comparing the shape on the North code sails page looks like a code 55. the sail is tired, I have to order a new one. I am thinking of cableless version. what's your suggestion?

code0.jpg

Share this post


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

This shape is working for my boat up to 7-8 knots "upwind". comparing the shape on the North code sails page looks like a code 55. the sail is tired, I have to order a new one. I am thinking of cableless version. what's your suggestion?

 

 

Where are you located and what handicap system are you operating under? If it were PHRF there would be a substantial penalty. The mid girth is more than 50% so it isn't rated as a jib or genoa. Mid girth is less 75% so it isn't a code zero. It's different, kill it before it reproduces.

 
Seriously, how do you use the sail? If it is a true reacher the cable less ought to work pretty well. If there is a windward component to your purpose, maybe not. What is the TWA performance of the existing sail? When you talk to the sailmaker see if he will guarantee to at least match the performance of the existing sail.
 
The Seahorse story is the best description of how the cable less sails were developed, how they work, and how they are constructed. Link in a previous post.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that sail looks like what ORR would call a "large roach headsail"

Quote

Large Roach Headsails or “Tweener” sails are sails that have an LPG greater than 1.1 x J of the LRH and a half width of more than 50% but less than 75% of the foot when measured as a spinnaker. 

Large-roach-headsail-sailplan

edit: whoops Jack, I see you covered this already. m'bad.

Share this post


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

that sail looks like what ORR would call a "large roach headsail"

Large-roach-headsail-sailplan

edit: whoops Jack, I see you covered this already. m'bad.

So, how does PHRF treat large roach headsails?

Share this post


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

Sail makers don't really concern themselves with TWA, but rather AWA as that is actually what's going on with their sail. 

Sailmakers talk in terms of apparent wind because that is the way their customers think. We look at the masthead  windex to see where the wind is. We watch the luff of the jib and the tell tells and are attuned to apparent wind.

 
If we have them, the wind  instrument is set to AWA because it is a direct measurement. TWA is the product of a computation that has two inaccurate inputs, AWA and BS, and the result  is not all that accurate. On a boat TWA  is consistently inaccurate so it is useful in a relative way. It can tell you which spinnaker to set up for the next leg.
 
Serious race programs develop sail crossover charts to tell them which sail combinations are best for current/anticipated conditions. These charts are based on TWS and TWA. The graphic from the North advertisement showing the performance ranges for the various code sail is TWS/TWA based. Ask a sail designer rather than a salesman what he uses.
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

that sail looks like what ORR would call a "large roach headsail"

Large-roach-headsail-sailplan

edit: whoops Jack, I see you covered this already. m'bad.

No worries! That said, I hope Chris Williams ducks back in here and talks about how helix construction will improve/impact the LRH game. 

1 hour ago, sailorman44 said:

So, how does PHRF treat large roach headsails?

They don’t. It’s an ORR feature (and maybe ORC but I don’t follow that rule) for now. I and many others waited with baited breath for @Jen and the IRC people to include language about LRHs/J0s in the 2019 rule update but it wasn’t addressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just checked and ORC considers a code zero to be 65% SMG compared to IRC at 75%. So I reiterate my plea for IRC and ORC to work together for the sake of owners who race both. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

18 minutes ago, jackolantern said:

Just checked and ORC considers a code zero to be 65% SMG compared to IRC at 75%. So I reiterate my plea for IRC and ORC to work together for the sake of owners who race both. 

+ 1 and let's get all the various PHRF regions on the same page for definitions, rating adjustments, base boat ratings and everything else that makes PHRF such a PITA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, sailorman44 said:

 

+ 1 and let's get all the various PHRF regions on the same page for definitions, rating adjustments, base boat ratings and everything else that makes PHRF such a PITA.

now you're just being funny :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

now you're just being funny :)

Yeah, I Know, wishful thinking. Don't want US Failing to take over administration of regional PHRF but you would think that they could coordinate some agreement on basic stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Helix design shifts the 75% mid girth measurement from the leech towards the luff, a lot of work was done with the 3di construction and design to produce a stable luff that would project forwards and hold shape. Early versions of the helix 3di code 0, that were tested by certain teams, had quite unstable luffs that “had a mind of their own” due to having to work without the torsion cable sewn into the luff to keep it steady. A further year of development was carried out to refine the 3di design to make the luff stable and easier to trim and drive through. This picture below shows the luff projection

53578BF3-6425-4C82-8478-8DC21928B016.thumb.jpeg.ef725f7901df972a295efcd6d475690b.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, RImike said:

Sail makers don't really concern themselves with TWA, but rather AWA as that is actually what's going on with their sail. 

Actually, all a north salemaker cares about is $PB (dollars per boat)

Share this post


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

No worries! That said, I hope Chris Williams ducks back in here and talks about how helix construction will improve/impact the LRH game. 

They don’t. It’s an ORR feature (and maybe ORC but I don’t follow that rule) for now. I and many others waited with baited breath for @Jen and the IRC people to include language about LRHs/J0s in the 2019 rule update but it wasn’t addressed.

Reading the Seahorse story and talking to the local North loft  it sound like North was late to the party and is scrambling to catch up. Maybe Chris Williams was told to back off?

 
As far a PHRF goes, it is new technology. Maybe they will consider it in 10 or 15 years. They are still trying to decide if multi hulls are really sail boats. Last year sport boats (Megels 32) were asked not to participate in Off Soundings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

back when Doyle first came out with the cableless sail it was very successful in its first year, the extra material from the leech was added to the luff and as a result the extra material folded back on itself to create a straight luff with a Genoa like leech profile, irc quickly banned this sail as a double luff sail and it was back to drawing board. North had been monitoring this, predicted the ban and didn’t take it much further.

it wasn’t until it could be found that you could make the luff project forward that North picked the development back up. Now as the largest sailmaker in the world you have to be careful taking new products to market before they are ready for the likes of average Joe to start bashing them around in his local club racing. 3di as an example was used for the first time in 2007 but it wasn’t until around 2011 that it became available to the mass market. North Helix code 0s have been in use for around 18 months with mixed success but it’s only now that they have become available to the mass market.

Rambler 88 currently has several cable free helix headsails on board. Quick piece of trivia, the torque loads on the tack of R88’s code 0 can reach up to 4 tons...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would talk to the folk at Evolution.  The Code 0's they have designed and that have been used in the Great Lakes are going

up wind quite well.  We did some comparisons with a couple of North (non Helix) Code 0s, and there was no comparison. 

I think Rodney has this figured out pretty well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, sailorman44 said:

Sailmakers talk in terms of apparent wind because that is the way their customers think. We look at the masthead  windex to see where the wind is. We watch the luff of the jib and the tell tells and are attuned to apparent wind.

 
If we have them, the wind  instrument is set to AWA because it is a direct measurement. TWA is the product of a computation that has two inaccurate inputs, AWA and BS, and the result  is not all that accurate. On a boat TWA  is consistently inaccurate so it is useful in a relative way. It can tell you which spinnaker to set up for the next leg.
 
Serious race programs develop sail crossover charts to tell them which sail combinations are best for current/anticipated conditions. These charts are based on TWS and TWA. The graphic from the North advertisement showing the performance ranges for the various code sail is TWS/TWA based. Ask a sail designer rather than a salesman what he uses.

TWA is from 3 questionably accurate readings not 2.. BS, AWA, and AWS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are finding that the cableless A0's will definitely sail higher angles than a traditional A0.  Without getting into the nuances of designing these sails, they tend to fly flatter and can be straighter aft sections than a traditional A0.  Because of these characteristics, they are significantly lower drag and less side (heeling force) for a given area and you can sail tighter angles and in more windspeed than what we have been used to with traditional 75% girth A0's.

With regards to the ORR "Large Roach Headsails" and ORCi where you are rating larger girth headsails (55%-75%) you can easily design a cableless headsail that sails very tight TWA's.  Testing is showing that sailing at 50deg TWA with a 60% girth LRH is no problem.

Below are some images from iQ of more upwind oriented cableless sails in development.  

AeroPresssure.thumb.PNG.439d85a41705322a6f0a3ee88831b2b7.PNGOverhead.thumb.PNG.3cc87518a0604df05e95278ed24e9873.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering all the above I can understand that there is no reason to for a cable Code Zero.

The ORC can rate a Code Zero with 55% medium girth but your rating goes to the sky.  I have run few test certificates and found that actually make sense to go only up to 75% because your rating is not affected.(seriously)

It seems also that the premium for 3Di is still very high.

So it's worth to pay almost the double for a Helix instead for a regular radial Code Zero on 36 ft boat.

*The boat is an X-362 masthead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JL92S said:

back when Doyle first came out with the cableless sail it was very successful in its first year, the extra material from the leech was added to the luff and as a result the extra material folded back on itself to create a straight luff with a Genoa like leech profile, irc quickly banned this sail as a double luff sail and it was back to drawing board. North had been monitoring this, predicted the ban and didn’t take it much further.

it wasn’t until it could be found that you could make the luff project forward that North picked the development back up. Now as the largest sailmaker in the world you have to be careful taking new products to market before they are ready for the likes of average Joe to start bashing them around in his local club racing. 3di as an example was used for the first time in 2007 but it wasn’t until around 2011 that it became available to the mass market. North Helix code 0s have been in use for around 18 months with mixed success but it’s only now that they have become available to the mass market.

Rambler 88 currently has several cable free helix headsails on board. Quick piece of trivia, the torque loads on the tack of R88’s code 0 can reach up to 4 tons...

Not sure where you got your info from but its not really telling the full story. Yes Doyle developed the first Furling Cable-less sail for the Maxi-72...Yes the Luff Flopped over, Yes IRC was quick to Outlaw it. After the very first one, we started developing Positive Luff projecting Cable-less sails. By the time IRC outlawed the original, we were already building several Luff projecting Cable-Less sails that were not only successful but dominating so much so that several top programs ordered them. Doyle has been delivering Cable-less, Positive Luff Flying 75% Mid Girth Code zeros for over two years now without any hesitation. In fact if you look at the articles written well over a year ago now, everything that North now states we said a long long time ago in fact back when Norths were still scratching their heads on how to make one. Trust me the "Cable-Less 3DI sails" they were testing on a few boats were total shockers.  No other sailmaker had anything like the Doyle sail or even close until very recently. We have already done several Paneled Cable-Less sails and have complete faith in their application. Their are still big advantages of the Stratis Cable-Less sails especially in the larger boats. Like it or not Norths have been playing catch up since and are only now getting it sort of right.  Its completely ok that your a North fan, but I dont think that you were really told all of the facts. While the Cable-less technology may be new for them, its not for Doyle and we are well advanced in the future of this technology and there are some sails out sailing right now that are the next game changer. And yes I do work for Doyle.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bella, Momo, Hugo Boss etc. Have all gone with Doyle, I know that the Doyle product hit the ground running and some teams wouldn’t have flocked there if they didn’t have the best product on the market. And it’s true the early 3di sails wern’t that great, hence they weren’t sold to Bob at the local sailing club for his 36.7. 12 months ago we asked about having one for our 3600 because I knew they existed and North told us what they had wasn’t ready yet so we went with a conventional A0. But now, today after the refinement of the 3di design (bag weight for a TP52 cable less A0 is less than half of that of a conventional A0) I think the North product makes a good case for itself. I have only given info on where North stand with their version of a cable less sail (almost any sailmaker will design and make one now) and talked about the pros and cons but not slammed anyone else’s equivalent product.

Share this post


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

We are finding that the cableless A0's will definitely sail higher angles than a traditional A0.  Without getting into the nuances of designing these sails, they tend to fly flatter and can be straighter aft sections than a traditional A0.  Because of these characteristics, they are significantly lower drag and less side (heeling force) for a given area and you can sail tighter angles and in more windspeed than what we have been used to with traditional 75% girth A0's.

With regards to the ORR "Large Roach Headsails" and ORCi where you are rating larger girth headsails (55%-75%) you can easily design a cableless headsail that sails very tight TWA's.  Testing is showing that sailing at 50deg TWA with a 60% girth LRH is no problem.

Below are some images from iQ of more upwind oriented cableless sails in development.  

 

 

Thanks for the graphics. Is the same set of sails represented in both graphics? If so the square head main is showing very little or no twist. Is that realistic? My square head main has twist at the top even when sheeted hard and with a lot of vang sheeting applied. Photos of other boats show a lot more twist than in shown in the graphic. 

 
I can't see a big upside for sales of LRH sails. In March of 2018 ECSA PHRF specifically outlawed them. Storsos indicates that ORC is treating them punitively. I don't know about ORC but PHRF usually makes the penalty twice what any performance benefit might be so as to discourage any innovation.
 
The only area that I see a market is for the traditional (75%) code zero. What kind of TWA performance can I expect from a North Helix code zero?
 
In my case PHRF will not allow me to have a 150% genoa with out a punitive penalty. I am rated for asymmetricals so need a sail that  will measure in as a code zero and has good windward performance. The question is a Helix code zero going to be any better than my cabled code zero? And at what cost?
 
My understanding of cable less construction, from the Seahorse story, is that the projected luff needs to be made from super strong vertically oriented material. In the case of North Helix that is 3Di. Can the rest of the sail be paneled construction to reduce cost?

Share this post


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

TWA is from 3 questionably accurate readings not 2.. BS, AWA, and AWS.

 

And the better instrument systems do back-calculate AWS/AWA from TWS/TWA.....

So if your TWS/TWA is not well calibrated, your AWS/AWA isn't either!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Big race programs spend more time calibrating their instruments than they do testing sails. Some of us average racers make an attempt to calibrate but most of us don't. We just accept, knowing that the instruments are not totally accurate, what we see. At least I can look up at the windex on the mast head and see that AWA on the instruments is in agreement. That gives me some assurance that the instruments are not completely out to lunch. Hopefully the numbers on the instruments are consistently inaccurate so that the results are use full in a relative way. Most of can't get out to sail more than twice a week; instrument are a sanity check that what we are seeing and feeling is actually happening

 
People that sail a lot don't really need instruments. Denis Conner once said that the best instrument is a fresh haircut.  To me, the best indicator of how the boat is going is the sound of the wake. When that sound changes, something happened. Look around ant try to figure out what changed.
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, sailorman44 said:

Those are Quantum program outputs not North.  

Thanks for the graphics. Is the same set of sails represented in both graphics? If so the square head main is showing very little or no twist. Is that realistic? My square head main has twist at the top even when sheeted hard and with a lot of vang sheeting applied. Photos of other boats show a lot more twist than in shown in the graphic. 

 
I can't see a big upside for sales of LRH sails. In March of 2018 ECSA PHRF specifically outlawed them. Storsos indicates that ORC is treating them punitively. I don't know about ORC but PHRF usually makes the penalty twice what any performance benefit might be so as to discourage any innovation.
 
The only area that I see a market is for the traditional (75%) code zero. What kind of TWA performance can I expect from a North Helix code zero?
 
In my case PHRF will not allow me to have a 150% genoa with out a punitive penalty. I am rated for asymmetricals so need a sail that  will measure in as a code zero and has good windward performance. The question is a Helix code zero going to be any better than my cabled code zero? And at what cost?
 
My understanding of cable less construction, from the Seahorse story, is that the projected luff needs to be made from super strong vertically oriented material. In the case of North Helix that is 3Di. Can the rest of the sail be paneled construction to reduce cost?

 

Share this post


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

Those are Quantum program outputs not North.  

My bad. I only remembered the Chris Q had worked for North. I'd still be interested in answers to my questions and comments.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, sailorman44 said:

My bad. I only remembered the Chris Q had worked for North. I'd still be interested in answers to my questions and comments.

All good - he probably has a good perspective on both products having worked for North and now being with Quantum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, sailorman44 said:

Big race programs spend more time calibrating their instruments than they do testing sails. 

Alright cmon, you're smart. This statement is just a bit silly don't you think. 

Big race programs will spend a week sailing with these sails and keeping a log of every change with nightly analyses of the log data  in order to define crossovers, leads, and sail selections as well as when and where to add a staysail. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some years ago I talked to a professional calibrator about helping me calibrate the instruments on my boat. The requirements were so stringent, so precise, so demanding before he would even look at my boat that I decided to live with consistent  inaccuracy, that relatively correct was good enough for my level of racing. It was he who told me that serious race programs are constantly checking calibration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, ZeeZee said:

 

And the better instrument systems do back-calculate AWS/AWA from TWS/TWA.....

So if your TWS/TWA is not well calibrated, your AWS/AWA isn't either!

 

 

Say what?  I think you may have it backwards:  What you can measure on a boat is AWS, AWA, BS, Heel angle.  All these go into calculating TWS and TWA not the other way around.  Off course you have to calibrate the sensors so you have accurate data to work with

Share this post


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

Say what?  I think you may have it backwards:  What you can measure on a boat is AWS, AWA, BS, Heel angle.  All these go into calculating TWS and TWA not the other way around.  Off course you have to calibrate the sensors so you have accurate data to work with

 

No, what you read is correct.

The Sailmon manual gives a good explanation on how back-calculated AWA/AWS is derived.   Read page 18 and 19:

https://sailmon.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Calibration-Manual-and-Data-Reference-Rev1.6.pdf

 

B&G and NKE do something similar (at least in their higher end systems). 

Share this post


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

 

No, what you read is correct.

The Sailmon manual gives a good explanation on how back-calculated AWA/AWS is derived.   Read page 18 and 19:

https://sailmon.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Calibration-Manual-and-Data-Reference-Rev1.6.pdf

 

B&G and NKE do something similar (at least in their higher end systems). 

I read the sailmon piece.  It states that you CAN get "backcalculated" AWA/AWS - but that really makes no sense to do - it just adds more chances to introduce errors in the readout

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/1/2019 at 1:44 AM, ZeeZee said:

 

And the better instrument systems do back-calculate AWS/AWA from TWS/TWA.....

So if your TWS/TWA is not well calibrated, your AWS/AWA isn't either!

 

 

TW is not a sensor reading.  How would apparent wind be calculated from TW?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, jackolantern said:

Poorly

 

On 2/2/2019 at 1:46 AM, ZeeZee said:

No, what you read is correct.

The Sailmon manual gives a good explanation on how back-calculated AWA/AWS is derived.   Read page 18 and 19:

https://sailmon.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Calibration-Manual-and-Data-Reference-Rev1.6.pdf

 

B&G and NKE do something similar (at least in their higher end systems). 

ok I  understand that AW can be calculated back again, but that seems kinda odd to do so.  The slightest error in raw data would make that back computed AW a pretty much nonsense reading.  Guess I'm more old school, I don't want instruments thinking too much for me.  I can interpret from experience what wind sheer is present and don't want some programmer who is not out there trying to figure it out in advance.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know it will shock you all, but my North sail maker recently talked me out of getting a cable-less A-0 Helix.  I just ordered a whole new set of sails for a new 3600-after a few different quotes from different sailmakers, went with North.  He gave me option of going with either standard or cable-less, but he made the point that for the first year with the boat, being short-handed and on the steepside of the learning curve, we were better off going with the standard A-0 because (in his experience) it furls tighter, will last a little longer and is cheaper.  So depends on who you are and what you are using the sail for.  We are shorthanded, and just learning about the boat. 

Go figure-a salesman who is trying to provide the right product for the individual sailor and not JUST make money.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is correct.  I forget how much more the cable added (wasn't much if I recall), but the added cost is from the Helix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting from FB

 

Fake news?

Recently, a customer brought our attention to the North Helix Code Zero sail, which was claimed to reduce the loading on the bowsprit and the rig up to 50%, compared to a normal Code with an anti-torsion cable in the luff. The Doyle "Cableless" would function similarly.

As this would appear to defy logic, how would distributing the load from the torsion cable into the sail reduce the loads in the corners? After all, the Code Zero is still supported flying from its corners, by the tack line, halyard and sheet only with cable in the luff or without. 

As the customer insisted, quoting that "the powerful North Design Suite tools" had proven the same, we felt we need to simulate the case ourselves.

In our simulation, we found that if any difference, the Code with the cable exerts a little lighter loads (about 10%) on both the bowsprit and the halyard. So no magic load reductions - if the total resultant force on the code 0 is similar, the corner loads will be similar, no matter if the load is carried by the torsion cable or the sail body structure itself.

https://www.northsails.com/sailing/en/2019/01/helix-sails-with-load-sharing-technology?fbclid=IwAR2OYZrnLH8KLXZAnbXMuCgyE8xU0Qjh8ph9aJDIwV6xHUvwaiQljGjfgBo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/14/2019 at 9:30 AM, OCS said:

Interesting from FB

 

Fake news?

Recently, a customer brought our attention to the North Helix Code Zero sail, which was claimed to reduce the loading on the bowsprit and the rig up to 50%, compared to a normal Code with an anti-torsion cable in the luff. The Doyle "Cableless" would function similarly.

As this would appear to defy logic, how would distributing the load from the torsion cable into the sail reduce the loads in the corners? After all, the Code Zero is still supported flying from its corners, by the tack line, halyard and sheet only with cable in the luff or without. 

As the customer insisted, quoting that "the powerful North Design Suite tools" had proven the same, we felt we need to simulate the case ourselves.

In our simulation, we found that if any difference, the Code with the cable exerts a little lighter loads (about 10%) on both the bowsprit and the halyard. So no magic load reductions - if the total resultant force on the code 0 is similar, the corner loads will be similar, no matter if the load is carried by the torsion cable or the sail body structure itself.

https://www.northsails.com/sailing/en/2019/01/helix-sails-with-load-sharing-technology?fbclid=IwAR2OYZrnLH8KLXZAnbXMuCgyE8xU0Qjh8ph9aJDIwV6xHUvwaiQljGjfgBo

The loads should be reduced through not needing to tension the furling cable as if it were a forestay to get the luff on the centre line. The cable free sails have an elliptical shaped luff that projects forwards and therefore to windward so that when viewed from the front the luff should be perfectly on the centreline. On our Sunfast 3600 we ease the backstay off, max our spinnaker halyard and then pull the backstay on hard to achieve a straight luff on our A0 which has a conventional cable with a straight cut luff that says to leeward. with a cable less sail the shape of the luff projects it forwards and to windward so it sits on the centre line. It achieves a straight luff through shape rather than raw tension 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any more thoughts on this since February? Wanting to fill the gap between my non-overlapping jib and my A-2 on a J/88. I am concerned about the load on the telescoping pole and have read lots of stuff on people engineering some different kinds of bob-stays but if the Helix really solves the problem without the bob-stay I am interested.

If I had to pick an area where I want to gain the most it would be tighter angles in less wind.

Dan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to go faster upwind in the light, I want a great big headsail but don't want it to count as a head sail...it will change my handicap.

One day you have to decide if you want a fast boat or you want a boat that does great on handicap.

You really need to take the P out of your PHRF and admit its really a set of rules you are building to.

PHRF should take into account performance and adjust accordingly but I guess thats unfair to the teams that win all the time because the rules favor their boat.

Winning on line or even passing a few boats during a race feels heaps better than some dodgy rules deciding that actually won after crossing the line 15th.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, BOI Guy said:

PHRF should take into account performance and adjust accordingly but I guess thats unfair to the teams that win all the time because the rules favor their boat. 

Not to derail the discussion, but the challenge w/rating Code Zero's fairly n PHRF is that it provides a [big] advantage only under a narrow set of circumstances. I guess the theory is that by forcing midgirth >75%, the sail is kneecapped to enough of an extent it can mostly be ignored.  But go below 75%, and they treat it like a 155% genoa (if it's allowed at all), and hit u with 6-9 sec.  (Which isn't fair, b/c the 155 genoa is useful over a broader range of wind speed/angles).

Personally I think a 6 sec hit is too much for 60-70 midgirth Code Zero, for 3 sec, I'd take the hit an enjoy a more useful sail. If PHRF could better tailor penalties to individual boats, then you wouldn't end up with these highly-compromised cheater sails. But then you are making it a measurement rule (which it sort of is anyway).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/26/2019 at 8:19 PM, Grande Mastere Dreade said:

there are certain rules   that occur here...

1) fuck off and post a pic of your wife / girlfriends /SO's   tits

2)  buy an ad 

His wife can easily kick your ass, and has likely won a lot more sailing events than you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does a Helix sail furl, without a cable?  I sailed on a boat this weekend with a new North Zero.  Either it was a Helix or had a tiny cable.  Whichever it was, it didn’t furl for crap.  Also, how does a Helix sail work with a top down furler?   My top down with a cable works by turning the cable inside a sleeve.  That turns the top swivel and the head without turn the tack area.  Can’t see how that works with a cableless zero?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, danstanford said:

Any more thoughts on this since February? Wanting to fill the gap between my non-overlapping jib and my A-2 on a J/88. I am concerned about the load on the telescoping pole and have read lots of stuff on people engineering some different kinds of bob-stays but if the Helix really solves the problem without the bob-stay I am interested.

If I had to pick an area where I want to gain the most it would be tighter angles in less wind.

Dan

We nearly went with a helix zero for our J88 but ultimately didn’t due to the health of the class where we race and the dwindling value of the boat. But we determined that a helix sail could work on the bowsprit without a bob stay where a normal cabled A0 couldn’t.

ultimately the sails do have a cable in them but a much smaller one. The main advantage of these sails seems to be the projecting luff. We have a SS on a sunfast 3600 that has a helix luff with no cable at all which makes the sail very light and easy to pack away

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Starboard!! said:

Not to derail the discussion, but the challenge w/rating Code Zero's fairly n PHRF is that it provides a [big] advantage only under a narrow set of circumstances. I guess the theory is that by forcing midgirth >75%, the sail is kneecapped to enough of an extent it can mostly be ignored.  But go below 75%, and they treat it like a 155% genoa (if it's allowed at all), and hit u with 6-9 sec.  (Which isn't fair, b/c the 155 genoa is useful over a broader range of wind speed/angles).

Personally I think a 6 sec hit is too much for 60-70 midgirth Code Zero, for 3 sec, I'd take the hit an enjoy a more useful sail. If PHRF could better tailor penalties to individual boats, then you wouldn't end up with these highly-compromised cheater sails. But then you are making it a measurement rule (which it sort of is anyway).

What PHRF heaven do you sail in?  ECSA PHRF would penalize you 30-60 seconds for an A0 with less than 75% midgirth. Actually ECSA flatly outlawed large roach jibs, which is what they would consider an A0 of less than 75% midgirth to be.

 

Share this post


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

How does a Helix sail furl, without a cable?  I sailed on a boat this weekend with a new North Zero.  Either it was a Helix or had a tiny cable.  Whichever it was, it didn’t furl for crap.  Also, how does a Helix sail work with a top down furler?   My top down with a cable works by turning the cable inside a sleeve.  That turns the top swivel and the head without turn the tack area.  Can’t see how that works with a cableless zero?

 

12 hours ago, Roleur said:

How does a Helix sail furl, without a cable?  I sailed on a boat this weekend with a new North Zero.  Either it was a Helix or had a tiny cable.  Whichever it was, it didn’t furl for crap.  Also, how does a Helix sail work with a top down furler?   My top down with a cable works by turning the cable inside a sleeve.  That turns the top swivel and the head without turn the tack area.  Can’t see how that works with a cableless zero?

North is not the only sailmaker making cableless A0 sails. Here is  an advertisement from an outfit called OneSails which contains a video of their cableless asym.  The sail in the video is shown to be furling and unfurling from bottom up on a slack halyard. Looks like a tight furl. Biggest drawback to OneSails is that they don't have a US loft.

 

Share this post


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

Any more thoughts on this since February? Wanting to fill the gap between my non-overlapping jib and my A-2 on a J/88. I am concerned about the load on the telescoping pole and have read lots of stuff on people engineering some different kinds of bob-stays but if the Helix really solves the problem without the bob-stay I am interested.

If I had to pick an area where I want to gain the most it would be tighter angles in less wind.

Dan

Dan I sent you a PM but I worked with a few of the J88's in Chicago to develop a Code Zero that can sail 55 true (30 AWA) in sub 10 knot conditions.  The sail sheets to the jib tracks and measures as a spinnaker.  We passed a number of 40 footers with a genoas and a 395 during the Chicao to Mackinac race.  We did need to add a bobstay, but were able to do it with minimal modification to the boat and a set up that is easily removed for class racing.

Andy

PS we already bought an Ad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sailorman44 said:

 

North is not the only sailmaker making cableless A0 sails. Here is  an advertisement from an outfit called OneSails which contains a video of their cableless asym.  The sail in the video is shown to be furling and unfurling from bottom up on a slack halyard. Looks like a tight furl. Biggest drawback to OneSails is that they don't have a US loft.

 

One does have a loft in the US.  Mark Washeim moved from Doyle to One a few months ago.  I'm sure you are going to see Dragon with One Sails pretty soon.

https://www.onesails.com/international/usa-north-atlantic

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a Helix Fr0 built for a 45' Racer/Cruiser with a fixed sprit this spring and it's been a dynamite, versatile, fast sail. Highly recommend. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2019 at 3:17 PM, Bad Andy said:

Dan I sent you a PM but I worked with a few of the J88's in Chicago to develop a Code Zero that can sail 55 true (30 AWA) in sub 10 knot conditions.  The sail sheets to the jib tracks and measures as a spinnaker.  We passed a number of 40 footers with a genoas and a 395 during the Chicao to Mackinac race.  We did need to add a bobstay, but were able to do it with minimal modification to the boat and a set up that is easily removed for class racing.

Andy

PS we already bought an Ad

Got a picture of it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JL92S said:

Got a picture of it?

Here is a shot of a her big sister off the J121.  This boat carried two zeros, this one and a monster we call the Whomper with a 40' foot.

IMG_20190710_160004641.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the Whomper, it has a structured luff for positive luff roach but carries a proper cable as well so it furls and stays furled correctly