Jump to content


trickle down


  • Please log in to reply
444 replies to this topic

#1 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,442 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 23 April 2014 - 02:59 AM

For the legion AC fans that boycott the FP - I say boycott no more - for Clean has seen the light.

Clean: "I can honestly say that this boat has the potential to change multihull racing forever all of a sudden, non-foilers just seem kind of silly."

It took a while, but we finally have video of Clean riding AC34 TNZ technology on a fully foiling catamaran!

More here:

http://forums.sailin...howtopic=140701

#2 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,442 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 23 April 2014 - 03:02 AM

Even better, the illustrious SimonN is leading the charge to bring TNZ boards to the masses:

http://forums.sailin...=2#entry4536488

#3 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,442 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 23 April 2014 - 03:08 AM

And, as they say, there is still more. Not just one, not just two, but three manufacturers are building production racing cats - all sporting AC34 technology (I like to say say TNZ technology, because they brought it to the world first):

Nacra: http://forums.sailin...68#entry4533677

Phantom:
http://forums.sailin...=4#entry4531886

#4 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,442 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 24 April 2014 - 03:00 AM

It would seem there is something of a gold-rush on in terms of cashing in on AC34 technology. The latest entry has noticeably skinny boards that are probably tricky to fly - as evidenced by the quick edits in the video. Recall the first six months of Oracle video!

SL33:
http://sailinganarch...4/22/get-on-up/

#5 Chris 249

Chris 249

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,486 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 03:43 AM

Do you think that the introduction of foiling into cats will cause the same sort of growth as in the mono classes that went to foiling or foil assistance?



#6 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,442 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 24 April 2014 - 04:03 AM

I am probably not the most qualified to respond - but foiling monos - anything other than a moth?

So if you simply want to count mothies - plus all the new sailors attracted to the flame - you might compare that to the existing A Class fleet (and perhaps divide by two - only keep those willing to repeal Rule 8)!

But the potential of a foiling multi seems so much greater than the mono - namely crew. Plus, the attractive simplicity of the self correcting TNZ foil. I pity the hapless builder of the foiling beachcat who went with wands - time to accept the NIH design and provide some self correcting foils!

#7 PeterHuston

PeterHuston

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,238 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 04:21 AM

Well...if anyone really wanted to get serious about foiling, they would look in the direction of totally automated foiling.

 

But first, you'd have to know where to look.

 

And Clean doesn't have a fucking clue about that.



#8 Chris 249

Chris 249

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,486 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 05:42 AM

Out of interest, I looked into the numbers doing national titles in four major English speaking sailing nations (USA, Australia, UK, NZ). The number of total entries in existing mono classes that use foils (N12, R, 14*) have dropped by about 1/3. Of the three full-foiling mono classes that have existed one is showing strong growth in one country (and significant growth in many other countries), one has died (RS600ff), and the other (the Kiwi R Class) has had its fleet halved since the first foils arrived (although external issues are a factor).

 

The full-foiling classes seem to have grown by 45 boats in about a decade, across four countries. That's not huge considering the publicity, the brilliance of some of the Moths, and the fact that Bladerider allegedly lost a couple of mill in what could well have been the biggest and best promotion campaign of a high-end racing dinghy ever done.

 

In that time, in at least one country there has been a rise in the overall national title attendance (non-foilers and non foilers alike) by about 17% in the UK with a major increase in the number of plastic boats, but I haven't got that figure for the other countries. If other countries echo the UK then the rise in full foilers across all classes is only about 15 boats more than the growth one would expect in those classes even if they had not gone to foiling. 

 

These are not complete figures, but they do seem to indicate pretty clearly that a "trickle down** " of foiling is not necessarily a boon for a class. The full foilers are still only about 1% of boats doing nationals in the country that has the biggest national fleets.

 

Fun to sail? Yep. Something that will come to the masses and change the wide fact of sailing participation forever? Hmmmm....

 

* UK Cherub not included as I'm not sure of foil use but since their numbers are fairly small it doesn't change the overall issue much)

 

** I say "trickle down" in quotes because of course most of the things the AC highlighted, like foils, wings and cats, actually started in small boats, so it's really a "trickle up and then back down".



#9 Tony-F18

Tony-F18

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,372 posts
  • Location:+31

Posted 24 April 2014 - 06:50 AM

Currently IMHO, the biggest obstacle for mass adoption of foiling boats is cost.
The foiling Phantom cat for example is around 35k,that's a lot of dosh for a 2 person cat with no one to compete against (not counting handicap).

#10 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,833 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 24 April 2014 - 09:52 AM

^

 

Adding foils to International Moths raised the cost 50-100% and also restricts practical venues to ones where it is possible to launch directly into deep water. Clearly, in the case of Moths, foiling has rescued what was a dying class and there have been enough people with the combination of money, fitness and sailing talent to support that development. A big plus for the Moths is that they can be cheaply shipped to international regattas - something that won't be true of multi-hulls.

 

Whether there is demand (and the necessary cash) from recreational sailors for foiling multihulls remains to be seen.Much debate is going on in the A-class - including the launching issue.



#11 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,833 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 24 April 2014 - 09:54 AM

** I say "trickle down" in quotes because of course most of the things the AC highlighted, like foils, wings and cats, actually started in small boats, so it's really a "trickle up and then back down".

 

Absolutely.



#12 Xlot

Xlot

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,907 posts
  • Location:Rome

Posted 24 April 2014 - 11:48 AM

For the legion AC fans that boycott the FP - I say boycott no more - for Clean has seen the light.


I'm sorry, but as far as I'm concerned Clean is permanently blacklisted - due to an exceedingly loutish (even by his standards) comment he made sometime ago. Trouble is, I don't remember what it was about any more, although I did copy it somewhere ..

Edit: found it

Google tells us that there are 3.99 million people reading this site that aren't you ...  or the couple hundred other whiny, shiteating, useless, sniping cocks that make the SA forums such a douchebaggish place..... Why do YOU think YOU count for anything besides somewhere for me to flick my ash?
(Clean,  12/19/2013)



#13 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,764 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 02:11 PM

For the legion AC fans that boycott the FP - I say boycott no more - for Clean has seen the light.


I'm sorry, but as far as I'm concerned Clean is permanently blacklisted - due to an exceedingly loutish (even by his standards) comment he made sometime ago. Trouble is, I don't remember what it was about any more, although I did copy it somewhere ..

Edit: found it

>Google tells us that there are 3.99 million people reading this site that aren't you ...  or the couple hundred other whiny, shiteating, useless, sniping cocks that make the SA forums such a douchebaggish place..... Why do YOU think YOU count for anything besides somewhere for me to flick my ash?
(Clean,  12/19/2013)

 

 

I had not seen that.  Yikes.  I nice way to treat his customers.



#14 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,764 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 02:19 PM

Out of interest, I looked into the numbers doing national titles in four major English speaking sailing nations (USA, Australia, UK, NZ). The number of total entries in existing mono classes that use foils (N12, R, 14*) have dropped by about 1/3. Of the three full-foiling mono classes that have existed one is showing strong growth in one country (and significant growth in many other countries), one has died (RS600ff), and the other (the Kiwi R Class) has had its fleet halved since the first foils arrived (although external issues are a factor).

 

The full-foiling classes seem to have grown by 45 boats in about a decade, across four countries. That's not huge considering the publicity, the brilliance of some of the Moths, and the fact that Bladerider allegedly lost a couple of mill in what could well have been the biggest and best promotion campaign of a high-end racing dinghy ever done.

 

In that time, in at least one country there has been a rise in the overall national title attendance (non-foilers and non foilers alike) by about 17% in the UK with a major increase in the number of plastic boats, but I haven't got that figure for the other countries. If other countries echo the UK then the rise in full foilers across all classes is only about 15 boats more than the growth one would expect in those classes even if they had not gone to foiling. 

 

These are not complete figures, but they do seem to indicate pretty clearly that a "trickle down** " of foiling is not necessarily a boon for a class. The full foilers are still only about 1% of boats doing nationals in the country that has the biggest national fleets.

 

Fun to sail? Yep. Something that will come to the masses and change the wide fact of sailing participation forever? Hmmmm....

 

* UK Cherub not included as I'm not sure of foil use but since their numbers are fairly small it doesn't change the overall issue much)

 

** I say "trickle down" in quotes because of course most of the things the AC highlighted, like foils, wings and cats, actually started in small boats, so it's really a "trickle up and then back down".

 

Wow, talk about a hell of a lot of effort that means nothing.

 

Trickle down from AC34 would be starting since the AC boats were developed, and would only be relevant with respect to multi-hulls since mono-hulls do not lend themselves to the same technology.  Rather than putting so much effort into analysis of historic development, prior to AC34, of boats that are not relevant, it might be better to just watch and see how interest in foiling, paired with ongoing development employing new concepts developed in AC34 (and the self-regulating foils really did not have any significant life before AC34) ends up translating to more foiling for the consumer sailing world (from dinghy to yacht). 

 

I find it interesting that many want to poo-poo the very idea that foiling could take off rather than being interested in how the potential of something that so dramatically improves performance can translate to the consumer sailing world.  But since most of the sailing world wants their boats to go faster, no matter what kind of boat (I have never heard anyone say they want their boat to be slower), it seems like it would be reasonable to hope for new advancements to somehow translate to as much of the sailing world as possible.  And if it does not relate to the kind of boat you are interested in, why be invested in poo-pooing its potential in the rest of the sailing world?



#15 Le Shark

Le Shark

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 208 posts
  • Location:UK

Posted 24 April 2014 - 02:41 PM

* UK Cherub not included as I'm not sure of foil use but since their numbers are fairly small it doesn't change the overall issue much)

 

All UK Cherubs built in the last ~10 years use horizontal lifting rudder foils, and quite a few older boats have been converted.

Numbers are fairly small at around 20 boats at a typical nationals but there is an upward trend in these numbers since the adoption of the rudder foils. It would be tough to argue whether or not these things are linked but theres no doubt that the foils have transformed the way the boats sail.



#16 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,833 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 24 April 2014 - 03:04 PM

I find it interesting that many want to poo-poo the very idea that foiling could take off rather than being interested in how the potential of something that so dramatically improves performance can translate to the consumer sailing world. 

 

I'm not sure "many" is correct, although "many" may be irritated by one of foiling's true believer's incessant posts.

 

FWIW I think foiling is very much part of the future of high performance sailing. Wingsails.....not so much.



#17 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,183 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 03:18 PM

FWIW I think foiling is very much part of the future of high performance sailing. Wingsails.....not so much.

 

On wingsails, and trickle-down at least to hi-po sailing, I like the idea that this by Gino M could be a really good development once some  AC sized resources have been brought to bear:

 

by KL at http://www.blueplanettimes.com/the-new-americas-cup-cat/  , bold mine

--

How can you design the boat if you don’t know the venue? Or if, as Larry Ellison once suggested, there could be more than one venue? Good question. Here we go—

 

Gino again: “One thing that was possible under the AC72 rule, but now is mandated, is a wing design that can be over-rotated to a negative angle of attack. You would do this at the top of the wing, so that instead of pushing the boat over, it’s actually pulling the boat up. Theoretically, if you’re bearing away around the weather mark in 30 knots, you can crank the wing inside out to get positive righting moment. You get a safer turn. The downside is that you’re inducing drag, which slows you down, so you’re going to have to learn how to actually do this. But it’s one way to build a big rig that will perform in San Diego but survive San Francisco.

“There are provisions in the new class rule to allow different wing sizes and jib sizes, but the ability to over-rotate the wing gives us a tool for sailing in a wide wind range with one wing.”

 

--

 

me: Much like with the self-correcting-ride-height foil shapes that ETNZ pioneered, and that we see creeping into some of the new cat styes listed above and elsewhere:

 

There's the potential that wings, especially new ones with the ability to generate extra RM, will be a big takeaway from AC35 if this facet of the DR does happen, a potential that we'd see this trickle down to hi-po cats too. You get the light weight necessary for efficient foiling, plus the RM you want but without the weight of a monohull's keel.



#18 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,833 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 24 April 2014 - 03:26 PM

^

 

Has nothing to do with making the logistics involved with wingsails accessible to 99.999% of sailors.



#19 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,183 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 03:31 PM

^

 

Has nothing to do with making the logistics involved with wingsails accessible to 99.999% of sailors.

So the F what?

 

There was plenty of discussion about the possibility to over-rotate wingtips in the lead-up to this past cycle and here we have Gino M saying it may be a key part of the next Rule.

 

If you don't think that idea has very cool possibilities, simply because you're stuck on if it would ever affect "99.999% of sailors,"  is completely irrelevant to my posted suggestion that this could be as important a coming development as the foil-shapes being adopted by, yes, hi-po cats.



#20 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,833 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 24 April 2014 - 03:34 PM

You are posting in a thread entitled "trickle down". That has some bearing on what's relevant.

 

Is this "fucking rude Thursday"? Practically every post in the last 12 hours is somebody abusing someone else.



#21 Xlot

Xlot

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,907 posts
  • Location:Rome

Posted 24 April 2014 - 03:35 PM


I think the latest GC-32 developments, with PCJ stating both downwind anf upwind stable foiling, are a game changer. Flybes can be taken for granted, now all is needed to "bring back" soft mains is flying tacks. And of course soft mains can be reefed ..

To the point that this should really be investigated before the AC35 Rule is issued (no gennakers, electric winches for mainsheet only)

#22 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,183 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 03:55 PM

You are posting in a thread entitled "trickle down". That has some bearing on what's relevant.

I simply disagree that trickle down need be defined as all the way to 99.999% of sailors.

Very few are sailing the foiling GC32's, winged SL33's, etc either. But it still is trickle-down by a reasonable enough definition that keeps it to within high performance sailing - which is after all what 99% of AC forum boat discussion is about.

The possibility to achieve RM through a wing specifically designed to achieve it, has an arguably large potential implication to foiling.

#23 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,833 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 24 April 2014 - 04:13 PM

SL33 as promoted as an OD aren't winged and neither is the GC32. So rather odd choices for a claim that wing-sails are relevant as "trickle-down".



#24 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,764 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 04:20 PM

^^ And to just assume it can't be done for the 99.99% because of the past is in itself a big assumption.  There are countless things in regular life that we couldn't have imagined trickling down from astronauts, professional motor sports, etc. 

 

The logistics issues, given what we have now, are certainly a major problem for wings.  But AC34 showed just how tame the boats can be with a not-so-elaborate mooring system, even with relatively crude wing systems compared to what will likely be possible in the future.  For instance, I do not think it would be out of the realm of possibility to have wing spars with flaps that can be extended by pressurized air or other means to provide the majority of the wing area.  Such a system could end up being easier to manage than current conventional cloth sails. 

 

We just don't know what tomorrow will bring, but poo-pooing the potential for advancements because of what we currently see as limitations is a good way to be stuck in today.



#25 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 24 April 2014 - 04:54 PM

I think one of the most important technologies that is "trickling down" is the "Uptip L foil" invented by TNZ and refined by a lot of people. The GC32 foils are directly related to TNZ's original work but they have taken it one step further: the GC32 uptip L foils are as stable or more so than a wand system! And that continues the TNZ breakthru and enhances it no end. Almost no rake adjustment is now a fact on the GC32 and to some extent on the Flying Phantom. Very few people realize the significance of this-it trully takes hydrofoil design to a new level of simplicity and efficiency.
And the new 19' Exocet Trimaran appears that it may be the first full size trimaran to use this technology on the amas.
All this development gives the words "exciting times" new meaning....

#26 jhc

jhc

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,669 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 04:55 PM

"There are countless things in regular life that we couldn't have imagined trickling down from astronauts,..."(gg)

 

Tang!

 

Wearing diapers while driving cross country...

 

Anyone have another?



#27 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,183 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 04:56 PM

SL33 as promoted as an OD aren't winged and neither is the GC32. So rather odd choices for a claim that wing-sails are relevant as "trickle-down".

Again: Foiling may be a takeaway from AC34 (and elsewhere, obviously) that is gaining traction - in classes including the above. But my suggestion goes farther: that it's possible that, going even more futuristic, the coolest advance come AC35 might be in wing technology that advances foiling ability even farther. Makes it even better through enhanced power.

The DR as Gino M has described it has ingredients that could lead to both better foils ~and~ more power through enhanced RM. If that happens with successful results then some amount of that will surely trickle down, to some classes in the future. It's a pretty exciting possibility for the direction that ~some~ of these high performance cats might take in the future.

The degree to which 'AC62s' might be able to leverage, generate, benefit from, extra RM this way remains to be seen; but if it does get encouraged enough then I just think it could be a pretty significant advance generated by AC35 - one that's perhaps even more (pun intended) leading-edge than whatever AC34's contributions to foiling have been so far. Obviously, hipo foiling benefits most by two basic ingredients: light weight, and power.

#28 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 24 April 2014 - 05:04 PM

While it could be significant if inverting the wing rig works for adding RM, foils have been used for close to 50 years to generate RM-notably on the Monitor,Hobie Trifoiler, the Rave and Osprey. But ,in my opinon, that can't compare to the development of a whole new way to foil resulting in foils that equal or surpass wand controlled foils and the resulting simplicity of the boat. These new foils and the technology behind them are an astounding breakthru in the history of hydrofoil sailing.

#29 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,183 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 05:08 PM

^ Agreed, although IF you are saying that the Monitor, etc, generate extra RM through foils ~that pull the windward hull down~ then: well getting that extra power through the wing just seems a far better solution, for a number of reasons, especially at larger scales. Safety included.

#30 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 24 April 2014 - 05:30 PM

Well, anytime you use a foil-hydrofoil or airfoil to generate force there is some drag penalty but on the boats I mentioned that is not as signifcant as the increase in RM. The penalty in those boats is the massive increase in structural strength required for a foil system that provides all the RM-and that is extra weight that they have to carry all the time.
I need to read more about exactly how the inverted rig is working. More "trickle down " from 34 if the concept wasn't already known on the C Class cats-have you asked anybody about that?

#31 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,183 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 05:45 PM

Well, anytime you use a foil-hydrofoil or airfoil to generate force there is some drag penalty but on the boats I mentioned that is not as signifcant as the increase in RM. The penalty in those boats is the massive increase in structural strength required for a foil system that provides all the RM-and that is extra weight that they have to carry all the time.
I need to read more about exactly how the inverted rig is working. More "trickle down " from 34 if the concept wasn't already known on the C Class cats-have you asked anybody about that?

Right, and some degree of additional structural strength would be required even if the RM were derived from the wing tip. But one of the designers, may have been Burns, while answering a Q about OR's flexy design, addressed the possibility to derive RM through a flying windward rudder and said any significant use of that would - for one - be 'too dangerous.' He also spoke of the flex as being a weight-saver, allowing for items like the wing-extending pod, by requiring less structure to support the rig tension that it takes to be extra-stiff. I don't quite have my head around if or how much extra rig-support strength would be required to sail with an invert-able wing.

 

Good question about if anyone leveraged it in the C Class, I did see it mentioned in an article about Groupama but forget where that discussion led.



#32 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 24 April 2014 - 06:02 PM

Well, anytime you use a foil-hydrofoil or airfoil to generate force there is some drag penalty but on the boats I mentioned that is not as signifcant as the increase in RM. The penalty in those boats is the massive increase in structural strength required for a foil system that provides all the RM-and that is extra weight that they have to carry all the time.
I need to read more about exactly how the inverted rig is working. More "trickle down " from 34 if the concept wasn't already known on the C Class cats-have you asked anybody about that?

Right, and some degree of additional structural strength would be required even if the RM were derived from the wing tip. But one of the designers, may have been Burns, while answering a Q about OR's flexy design, addressed the possibility to derive RM through a flying windward rudder and said any significant use of that would - for one - be 'too dangerous.' He also spoke of the flex as being a weight-saver, allowing for items like the wing-extending pod, by requiring less structure to support the rig tension that it takes to be extra-stiff. I don't quite have my head around if or how much extra rig-support strength would be required to sail with an invert-able wing.
 

Good question about if anyone leveraged it in the C Class, I did see it mentioned in an article about Groupama but forget where that discussion led.

 

Maybe none at all since, as best I understand it, the inverted wing would relieve the heeling force on the rig- reducing loads?(allowing the existing RM to be more effective?) Except there might be some localized additional structure but I don't know-I tend to doubt it. Interesting stuff.



#33 Basiliscus

Basiliscus

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 661 posts
  • Location:Des Moines, WA, USA

Posted 24 April 2014 - 06:52 PM

FWIW I think foiling is very much part of the future of high performance sailing. Wingsails.....not so much.

 

...Gino again: “...“There are provisions in the new class rule to allow different wing sizes and jib sizes, but the ability to over-rotate the wing gives us a tool for sailing in a wide wind range with one wing.”

 

--

 

me: Much like with the self-correcting-ride-height foil shapes that ETNZ pioneered, and that we see creeping into some of the new cat styes listed above and elsewhere:

 

There's the potential that wings, especially new ones with the ability to generate extra RM, will be a big takeaway from AC35 if this facet of the DR does happen, a potential that we'd see this trickle down to hi-po cats too. You get the light weight necessary for efficient foiling, plus the RM you want but without the weight of a monohull's keel.

 

With regard to wingsails, yes, it is possible to generate righting moment with wingsails by over-twisting the head.  That was one of the reasons the AC72 went with the single tall wing to cover the entire design wing range.  It is efficient to use a tall rig with twist to lower the center of effort.  However, twist does not change the fact that the change in lift from gusts or from trimming the wing's angle of attack acts on the entire span of the wing:

Fig21.gif

 

So although you can balance the steady moments with twist, you need to be on your toes because the tall rig will be twitchy.



#34 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,183 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 07:40 PM

Twitchy indeed, for the triimmer and other crew too..

Almost sounds like you are diminishing the notion of the practicality of generating genuine RM, and suggesting instead that it's more a 'spill the power' feature for surviving SF with a SD sized wing?

#35 jhc

jhc

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,669 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 07:49 PM

What you are not taking into account is the variations in lateral resistance, due to the hulls and foils ride height, and subsequent variations in leeway. That feature alters the "rm" quickly, and dramatically. I would venture that the additional resistance added to the sail plan by reversing the wing camber aloft would make that method far less effective than simply adjusting ride height, higher to increase side slip, lower to increase grip.

Reversing camber aloft may be a way to "save" a capsize as has been discussed, but not an effective way to "depower" the sail plan.

Remember, at the speeds the ac72s were going, windage is the biggest hurdle to overcome, and reversing camber aloft could easily cause a stall to that section of the wing, and increase the windage, and drag in a huge and immediate way.



#36 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,183 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 08:09 PM

^ "What you are not taking into account is the variations in lateral resistance, due to the hulls and foils ride height, and subsequent variations in leeway. That feature alters the "rm" quickly, and dramatically."
Get that, but how do you adjust ride height quickly and dramatically?

Am trying to imagine an 'automatic' reverse-camber adjustment mechanism up high, surely that's a more plausible scenario?

#37 Xlot

Xlot

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,907 posts
  • Location:Rome

Posted 24 April 2014 - 08:11 PM

So although you can balance the steady moments with twist, you need to be on your toes because the tall rig will be twitchy.


And that with a logistical nightmare that's so expensive it'll be one-design ..

Forgive me if I insist, but what would then be the perceivable advantage over a (reefable) soft main? Loads on the platform are cheap to solve, mainsheet effort would indeed require going back to powered winches, to my mind the one determining factor would be speed of tacking: if this can be demonstrated to be in the same range thanks to new techniques (roll tacking or flying tacks), there's no rational justification for staying with a wing.

#38 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 24 April 2014 - 08:38 PM

^ "What you are not taking into account is the variations in lateral resistance, due to the hulls and foils ride height, and subsequent variations in leeway. That feature alters the "rm" quickly, and dramatically."
Get that, but how do you adjust ride height quickly and dramatically?

Am trying to imagine an 'automatic' reverse-camber adjustment mechanism up high, surely that's a more plausible scenario?

 

Change foil rake-should be as much as you need and quickly.....



#39 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,442 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 24 April 2014 - 08:53 PM

I think one of the most important technologies that is "trickling down" is the "Uptip L foil" invented by TNZ and refined by a lot of people. The GC32 foils are directly related to TNZ's original work but they have taken it one step further: the GC32 uptip L foils are as stable or more so than a wand system! And that continues the TNZ breakthru and enhances it no end. Almost no rake adjustment is now a fact on the GC32 and to some extent on the Flying Phantom. Very few people realize the significance of this-it trully takes hydrofoil design to a new level of simplicity and efficiency.
And the new 19' Exocet Trimaran appears that it may be the first full size trimaran to use this technology on the amas.
All this development gives the words "exciting times" new meaning....

have to agree that the TNZ foil is a different - and vastly more appealing - beast than foils needing wands or adjustments.

Why not just call it the TNZ foil? Give credit where credit is due - and we could use a simple term to help familiarize the concept.

#40 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,442 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 24 April 2014 - 08:59 PM


For the legion AC fans that boycott the FP - I say boycott no more - for Clean has seen the light.

I'm sorry, but as far as I'm concerned Clean is permanently blacklisted - due to an exceedingly loutish (even by his standards) comment he made sometime ago. Trouble is, I don't remember what it was about any more, although I did copy it somewhere ..

Edit: found it

Google tells us that there are 3.99 million people reading this site that aren't you ...  or the couple hundred other whiny, shiteating, useless, sniping cocks that make the SA forums such a douchebaggish place..... Why do YOU think YOU count for anything besides somewhere for me to flick my ash?
(Clean,  12/19/2013)

damn - need to go wash my hair now...

#41 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,442 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 24 April 2014 - 09:03 PM

Currently IMHO, the biggest obstacle for mass adoption of foiling boats is cost.
The foiling Phantom cat for example is around 35k,that's a lot of dosh for a 2 person cat with no one to compete against (not counting handicap).

it seems to me that - unlike fiddly foiling solutions - the TNZ foil is just one piece. Catamarans already have daggerboards - now they just need a stronger slot and away we go.

The foiling Hobie 14 may be just over the horizon.

#42 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 24 April 2014 - 09:06 PM

Everytime I talk about this foil breakthru I give credit to TNZ. But they don't deserve all the credit for all the refinements. The GC32 foils have taken the TNZ idea and improved it to the point that it's behaviour is equal to or better than a wand system-thats a really  big deal. The GC32 guys are not operating in a vacuum though-the Flying Phantom and the Groupama C Cat also require very little adjustment underway. This is really cool stuff and the TNZ Team deserve a lot of credit for inventing a whole new kind of foil-but the guys doing the refining deserve their share of credit as well..

 

I think one of the most important technologies that is "trickling down" is the "Uptip L foil" invented by TNZ and refined by a lot of people. The GC32 foils are directly related to TNZ's original work but they have taken it one step further: the GC32 uptip L foils are as stable or more so than a wand system! And that continues the TNZ breakthru and enhances it no end. Almost no rake adjustment is now a fact on the GC32 and to some extent on the Flying Phantom. Very few people realize the significance of this-it trully takes hydrofoil design to a new level of simplicity and efficiency.
And the new 19' Exocet Trimaran appears that it may be the first full size trimaran to use this technology on the amas.
All this development gives the words "exciting times" new meaning....

have to agree that the TNZ foil is a different - and vastly more appealing - beast than foils needing wands or adjustments.

Why not just call it the TNZ foil? Give credit where credit is due - and we could use a simple term to help familiarize the concept.


#43 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,442 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 24 April 2014 - 09:07 PM

...well, the equivalent of the Hobie 14.

I guess the big deal with the H14 is that it had no daggerboards at all!

Still, less is more.

#44 nav

nav

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,451 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 09:08 PM


>Google tells us that there are 3.99 million people reading this site that aren't you ...  or the couple hundred other whiny, shiteating, useless, sniping cocks that make the SA forums such a douchebaggish place..... Why do YOU think YOU count for anything besides somewhere for me to flick my ash?
(Clean,  12/19/2013)

 

I had not seen that.  Yikes.  I nice way to treat his customers.

 

If you're not paying, you're the product rather than the customer!
 



#45 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 24 April 2014 - 09:09 PM

Currently IMHO, the biggest obstacle for mass adoption of foiling boats is cost.
The foiling Phantom cat for example is around 35k,that's a lot of dosh for a 2 person cat with no one to compete against (not counting handicap).

it seems to me that - unlike fiddly foiling solutions - the TNZ foil is just one piece. Catamarans already have daggerboards - now they just need a stronger slot and away we go.

The foiling Hobie 14 may be just over the horizon.

 

You're the second person today that has mentioned something like that-and you're so right. But it may be a tri........



#46 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,442 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 24 April 2014 - 09:12 PM


Everytime I talk about this foil breakthru I give credit to TNZ. But they don't deserve all the credit for all the refinements. The GC32 foils have taken the TNZ idea and improved it to the point that it's behaviour is equal to or better than a wand system-thats a really  big deal. The GC32 guys are not operating in a vacuum though-the Flying Phantom and the Groupama C Cat also require very little adjustment underway. This is really cool stuff and the TNZ Team deserve a lot of credit for inventing a whole new kind of foil-but the guys doing the refining deserve their share of credit as well..
 


I think one of the most important technologies that is "trickling down" is the "Uptip L foil" invented by TNZ and refined by a lot of people. The GC32 foils are directly related to TNZ's original work but they have taken it one step further: the GC32 uptip L foils are as stable or more so than a wand system! And that continues the TNZ breakthru and enhances it no end. Almost no rake adjustment is now a fact on the GC32 and to some extent on the Flying Phantom. Very few people realize the significance of this-it trully takes hydrofoil design to a new level of simplicity and efficiency.
And the new 19' Exocet Trimaran appears that it may be the first full size trimaran to use this technology on the amas.
All this development gives the words "exciting times" new meaning....

have to agree that the TNZ foil is a different - and vastly more appealing - beast than foils needing wands or adjustments.

Why not just call it the TNZ foil? Give credit where credit is due - and we could use a simple term to help familiarize the concept.
my assumption is that the GC foil is just a TNZ foil big enough to lift a truck. The GC is not a race boat designed to have as much speed, hence minimum control., as possible.

In other words - a GC foil wouldn't have won the cup.

Or why is it different other than in dimension?

#47 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 24 April 2014 - 09:35 PM

It is a larger foil proportionately compared ,say, to the SL33 but it is also different in the amount of uptip-and ,according to the designers, some other refinements. The "L" foil that won the Cup was more like the Hydros C Cat foil-not a whole lot of "uptip" and therefore required frequent adjustment. The more "uptip" the foil has the more drag but the more stable it is. The Groupama C Class cat foil was more like the Flying Phantom foil-lots of uptip compared to Hydros . Hydros was faster but very unstable and Groupama won. So, stability can be important for more than just easier handling. The GC32 seems to have the right combination of refinements to the original TNZ concept-speed coupled with ease of handling(few foil adjustments). 



#48 Xlot

Xlot

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,907 posts
  • Location:Rome

Posted 24 April 2014 - 09:36 PM

^ ^



From 0:40 onwards: acute angle for the foil "V", as opposed to nearly right angle

#49 ozchrisb

ozchrisb

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 285 posts
  • Location:San Francisco

Posted 24 April 2014 - 09:45 PM

Doug, ride height is still controller by leeway so I don't see why this is better that a wand for upwind foiling. And how can we possibly know it's better? What side by side comparisons have been done to show this? Wand's are still advantageous at changing the foil shape. You don't want as much lift at speed you want a less cambered profile. Upturned L's don't do this.



#50 jhc

jhc

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,669 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 09:53 PM

Call it the m3 concept:morrelli/melvin/marvel
Credit where it is due.

#51 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 24 April 2014 - 10:10 PM

The best side by side comparisons I've seen are the GC32 videos, the SL33 videos, Rave videos, personal experience sailing a Rave, the first Osprey video and Moth videos. I have not noticed one iota of difference between any wand controlled boats ride height stability and that of the GC32 on foils. And the GC32 takes off in the same wind a Moth does. So, it seems there is no, zero, advantage to the wand controlled boat except where it is the only alternative-there is no way a TNZ type foil could effectively replace the wand controlled main foil on a Moth. But there is no advantage that I've been able to see EXCEPT that a multihull with dual independent wands has virtually unlimited RM-which has an effect on the weight of the structure. No other difference that I've seen. Just watch the videos-there's a new GC32 video coming soon. The GC32 and Flying Phantom are breakthru's in the application of the TNZ concept-and thats huge!



#52 Chris 249

Chris 249

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,486 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 10:17 PM

Out of interest, I looked into the numbers doing national titles in four major English speaking sailing nations (USA, Australia, UK, NZ). The number of total entries in existing mono classes that use foils (N12, R, 14*) have dropped by about 1/3. Of the three full-foiling mono classes that have existed one is showing strong growth in one country (and significant growth in many other countries), one has died (RS600ff), and the other (the Kiwi R Class) has had its fleet halved since the first foils arrived (although external issues are a factor).

 

The full-foiling classes seem to have grown by 45 boats in about a decade, across four countries. That's not huge considering the publicity, the brilliance of some of the Moths, and the fact that Bladerider allegedly lost a couple of mill in what could well have been the biggest and best promotion campaign of a high-end racing dinghy ever done.

 

In that time, in at least one country there has been a rise in the overall national title attendance (non-foilers and non foilers alike) by about 17% in the UK with a major increase in the number of plastic boats, but I haven't got that figure for the other countries. If other countries echo the UK then the rise in full foilers across all classes is only about 15 boats more than the growth one would expect in those classes even if they had not gone to foiling. 

 

These are not complete figures, but they do seem to indicate pretty clearly that a "trickle down** " of foiling is not necessarily a boon for a class. The full foilers are still only about 1% of boats doing nationals in the country that has the biggest national fleets.

 

Fun to sail? Yep. Something that will come to the masses and change the wide fact of sailing participation forever? Hmmmm....

 

* UK Cherub not included as I'm not sure of foil use but since their numbers are fairly small it doesn't change the overall issue much)

 

** I say "trickle down" in quotes because of course most of the things the AC highlighted, like foils, wings and cats, actually started in small boats, so it's really a "trickle up and then back down".

 

Wow, talk about a hell of a lot of effort that means nothing.

 

Trickle down from AC34 would be starting since the AC boats were developed, and would only be relevant with respect to multi-hulls since mono-hulls do not lend themselves to the same technology.  Rather than putting so much effort into analysis of historic development, prior to AC34, of boats that are not relevant, it might be better to just watch and see how interest in foiling, paired with ongoing development employing new concepts developed in AC34 (and the self-regulating foils really did not have any significant life before AC34) ends up translating to more foiling for the consumer sailing world (from dinghy to yacht). 

 

I find it interesting that many want to poo-poo the very idea that foiling could take off rather than being interested in how the potential of something that so dramatically improves performance can translate to the consumer sailing world.  But since most of the sailing world wants their boats to go faster, no matter what kind of boat (I have never heard anyone say they want their boat to be slower), it seems like it would be reasonable to hope for new advancements to somehow translate to as much of the sailing world as possible.  And if it does not relate to the kind of boat you are interested in, why be invested in poo-pooing its potential in the rest of the sailing world?

 

When there is a decade or so of evidence proving that only a tiny proportion of the world's sailors have moved to foiling despite the fact that it has been setting new performance standards for years it is certainly relevant to the issue of whether the AC "trickle down" has the potential to change multihull sailing forever in a major way, as claimed. How can you predict where we could go if you ignore where we have been and where we are?

 

I am not in any way poo-pooing foiling, which is why I clearly said that foiling is fun and can lead to fantastic performance. The fact that you or I or anyone else enjoys it is great, but that doesn't mean that so many people will take it up that it will necessarily change multihull sailing in a major way - or in a good way. I enjoyed the days of televised pro windsailing when I got to hang upside-down above the waves competing with the world's best paid pros in front of thousands of spectators too, but that whole scene crashed because everyone got caught up in the hype and ignored the reality.

 

Most of the sailing world isn't actually that concerned about making their boats go much faster in absolute terms - that's why Lasers have always outsold Canoes, why boats like the Lightning, Snipe and Enterprise are vastly more popular than skiffs,and why Hobie 16s and Darts are vastly more popular than F16s. 

 

I am concerned that there is evidence that moving a sport further towards performance at the expense of accessibility will harm its overall popularity. Most of the popular and growing sports are those in which even the pros use fairly cheap and accessible gear and sailing has been losing that, and losing numbers. This is NOT attacking development or high-performance classes, it's simply a reference to the issues that could be solved. I do feel that there are many more people who ignore the issues who come from the USA. That sort of thinking could be one reason why sailing is doing so poorly there.

 

I'm not poo-pooing anything - I'm just trying to look at the reality because it's a better way to solve issues than shutting our eyes to them. 



#53 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,754 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 24 April 2014 - 10:27 PM

.

 

..it's hard to call those 1/2 MILL EURO machines....'trickle-down' :mellow:

 

 

 

.....how long 'till some rich punter gets one?? :mellow:



#54 SimonN

SimonN

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,047 posts
  • Location:Sydney ex London

Posted 24 April 2014 - 10:34 PM

The best side by side comparisons I've seen are the GC32 videos, the SL33 videos, Rave videos, personal experience sailing a Rave, the first Osprey video and Moth videos. I have not noticed one iota of difference between any wand controlled boats ride height stability and that of the GC32 on foils. And the GC32 takes off in the same wind a Moth does. So, it seems there is no, zero, advantage to the wand controlled boat except where it is the only alternative-there is no way a TNZ type foil could effectively replace the wand controlled main foil on a Moth. But there is no advantage that I've been able to see EXCEPT that a multihull with dual independent wands has virtually unlimited RM-which has an effect on the weight of the structure. No other difference that I've seen. Just watch the videos-there's a new GC32 video coming soon. The GC32 and Flying Phantom are breakthru's in the application of the TNZ concept-and thats huge!

Come on Doug. You know better than this. You cannot compare the boats you are trying to compare. To say a GS32 takes off in the same wind as a Moth is rather unhelpful. What is needed is for some back to back testing of boats of the same size, say 2 GC32's. I believe you would see huge advantages to the boat using T foils with a wand. To start with, the TNZ system relies on loss of lift due to the foil rising close to the surface. Looking at the  amount of water we could see being moved by the AC72's, do you really believe that fully submerged foils like we see on a Moth would give as much drag? I would put a lot of money on a T foil wand system being significantly quicker on like for like boats.

 

That does not say that this V foil system isn't great, which it is, or that it isn't the best solution in many applications, but you cannot make sweeping claims without any proper comparative evidence to back it up.



#55 Chris 249

Chris 249

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,486 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 10:52 PM

* UK Cherub not included as I'm not sure of foil use but since their numbers are fairly small it doesn't change the overall issue much)

 

All UK Cherubs built in the last ~10 years use horizontal lifting rudder foils, and quite a few older boats have been converted.

Numbers are fairly small at around 20 boats at a typical nationals but there is an upward trend in these numbers since the adoption of the rudder foils. It would be tough to argue whether or not these things are linked but theres no doubt that the foils have transformed the way the boats sail.

 

Thanks for that info.



#56 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 24 April 2014 - 11:06 PM

The best side by side comparisons I've seen are the GC32 videos, the SL33 videos, Rave videos, personal experience sailing a Rave, the first Osprey video and Moth videos. I have not noticed one iota of difference between any wand controlled boats ride height stability and that of the GC32 on foils. And the GC32 takes off in the same wind a Moth does. So, it seems there is no, zero, advantage to the wand controlled boat except where it is the only alternative-there is no way a TNZ type foil could effectively replace the wand controlled main foil on a Moth. But there is no advantage that I've been able to see EXCEPT that a multihull with dual independent wands has virtually unlimited RM-which has an effect on the weight of the structure. No other difference that I've seen. Just watch the videos-there's a new GC32 video coming soon. The GC32 and Flying Phantom are breakthru's in the application of the TNZ concept-and thats huge!

Come on Doug. You know better than this. You cannot compare the boats you are trying to compare. To say a GS32 takes off in the same wind as a Moth is rather unhelpful. What is needed is for some back to back testing of boats of the same size, say 2 GC32's. I believe you would see huge advantages to the boat using T foils with a wand. To start with, the TNZ system relies on loss of lift due to the foil rising close to the surface. Looking at the  amount of water we could see being moved by the AC72's, do you really believe that fully submerged foils like we see on a Moth would give as much drag? I would put a lot of money on a T foil wand system being significantly quicker on like for like boats.

 

That does not say that this V foil system isn't great, which it is, or that it isn't the best solution in many applications, but you cannot make sweeping claims without any proper comparative evidence to back it up.

 

Simon, watching a boat going thru the water with  rock steady ride height stability is a damn good indication of the effectiveness of it's foil system in regard to heave stability-no two ways about it. And if such a boat begins to foil in the same wind strength as a Moth it is far from unhelpful: it is an indication of an extremely efficient foil system. Every foil system relies on some method of  controlling ride height using a method of reducing and increasing lift-whether its done with leeway coupling, changes due to speed with a surface piercing foil or changes in effective foil shape by the use of a wand and flap.

That comment /question is absolutely ludicrous! The GC32 foils are significantly advanced over the foils used in the AC for the purpose of making a fast, easy to sail foiler-which ,apparently, they have succeded at. The Hydros C Cat foils have more in common with the AC boats and Groupama foils more in common with the Flying Phantom and GC 32. And Groupama won in head to head competition!

There is a lot you seem not to understand about the application of dual wand systems to a multihull:

1) An effective dual wand system(like Osprey) requires an oversquare beam so that the foils are not overloaded. Wouldn't work well at all on a boat like the GC32 compared to the TNZ foil system,

2) The dual wand system is capable of loading the boat incredibly and requires a much stronger structure than is required for the variations on the TNZ system since the dual wand system creates all the RM for the boat and then some. This requires a heavier boat for the extra structure required.

Assuming both boats are designed with the RM they require, the advantage goes again to the lighter  TNZ concept,

3) A multi with dual wands requires four foils in the water at all times whereas the TNZ concept sails normally with only three foils and two of them are lightly loaded rudder foils. It can also sail well on just two foils. This is a major advantage to the refined TNZ foils used on the GC 32.

4) Didn't Rocker prove anything to you?! With her dual independent wand controlled foils, she wasn't as fast as a "C" hugger(pun intended).

----

Again, watch the performance of the GC32 and any other foiling boat and you'll see an efficient ,rock stable, foiler that has taken foiler design to the next higher plane in terms of heave stability, speed, early takeoff, and windward foiling. There is not a better catamaran foiling system anywhere, in my opinion. 

But wand systems may have value on the main hull of an oversquare trimaran coupled with TNZ type foils on the amas in terms of getting the main hull out of the water in light air(5 knots) and enhanced pitch control. Thats another story.........



#57 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 24 April 2014 - 11:33 PM

There is another wand configuration that might work: dual wands on retractable mainfoils where the windward main foil and wand are always retracted. This could allow the use of a straight "L" foil (that has been proven faster than an uptip foil) with wand altitude control. Problems are making a flap work on an "L" foil, or having to use a "T" foil for main foils.  I think I'd bet on the refined TNZ configuration foils but it may be worth a try.

I've got to remember to ask ITA 16 if his boat could be sailed with the windward foil and wand retracted...



#58 CT>

CT>

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 40 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 11:50 PM

The GC32 foils are significantly advanced over the foils used in the AC for the purpose of making a fast, easy to sail foiler-which ,apparently, they have succeded at. The Hydros C Cat foils have more in common with the AC boats and Groupama foils more in common with the Flying Phantom and GC 32. And Groupama won in head to head competition!

 

 

Doug,

 

That is such a ridiculous comparison that I probably shouldn't even being responding...

 

The AC boats could have made more stable foils, but they didn't because it wasn't fast.  Go back and watch footage of the TNZ vs. LR races.  LR was extremely stable, but that came at a price.  The dynamic behavior of big boats vs. small is completely different and requires different solutions.  In the case of the GC32, it makes complete sense to go the direction they have...to harp on about it being revolutionary is a stretch...



#59 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 25 April 2014 - 12:13 AM

The GC32 foils are significantly advanced over the foils used in the AC for the purpose of making a fast, easy to sail foiler-which ,apparently, they have succeded at. The Hydros C Cat foils have more in common with the AC boats and Groupama foils more in common with the Flying Phantom and GC 32. And Groupama won in head to head competition!

 

 

Doug,

 

That is such a ridiculous comparison that I probably shouldn't even being responding...

 

The AC boats could have made more stable foils, but they didn't because it wasn't fast.  Go back and watch footage of the TNZ vs. LR races.  LR was extremely stable, but that came at a price.  The dynamic behavior of big boats vs. small is completely different and requires different solutions.  In the case of the GC32, it makes complete sense to go the direction they have...to harp on about it being revolutionary is a stretch...

 

The fact is what they have done is quite significant in taking the same basic configuration used in the AC and refining it to the point that there is very little to no foil adjustment required when on the foils. If you don't understand that you're missing a big part of the story of state of the art foil development. The comparison I made was between foils with little "uptip" angle to foils with lots of uptip angle and it is a very valid comparison-I guess you didn't understand that either?

Based on what you said I agree 100%,,,,



#60 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,764 posts

Posted 25 April 2014 - 12:19 AM

 

>Google tells us that there are 3.99 million people reading this site that aren't you ...  or the couple hundred other whiny, shiteating, useless, sniping cocks that make the SA forums such a douchebaggish place..... Why do YOU think YOU count for anything besides somewhere for me to flick my ash?
(Clean,  12/19/2013)

 

I had not seen that.  Yikes.  I nice way to treat his customers.

 

If you're not paying, you're the product rather than the customer!
 

In a advertiser-sponsored site, we are the equivalent of customers.  We go away, his advertisers go away.  We and the advertisers can be seen as one.



#61 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,442 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 25 April 2014 - 02:20 AM


The GC32 foils are significantly advanced over the foils used in the AC for the purpose of making a fast, easy to sail foiler-which ,apparently, they have succeded at. The Hydros C Cat foils have more in common with the AC boats and Groupama foils more in common with the Flying Phantom and GC 32. And Groupama won in head to head competition!

 
 
Doug,
 
That is such a ridiculous comparison that I probably shouldn't even being responding...
 
The AC boats could have made more stable foils, but they didn't because it wasn't fast.  Go back and watch footage of the TNZ vs. LR races.  LR was extremely stable, but that came at a price.  The dynamic behavior of big boats vs. small is completely different and requires different solutions.  In the case of the GC32, it makes complete sense to go the direction they have...to harp on about it being revolutionary is a stretch...
 
The fact is what they have done is quite significant in taking the same basic configuration used in the AC and refining it to the point that there is very little to no foil adjustment required when on the foils. If you don't understand that you're missing a big part of the story of state of the art foil development. The comparison I made was between foils with little "uptip" angle to foils with lots of uptip angle and it is a very valid comparison-I guess you didn't understand that either?
Based on what you said I agree 100%,,,,
interesting - because when I watch the GC foil it reminds me completely of LR. Watching LR foil was like a kid on a trike - so much stability it looked like a tripod.

Minimal adjustment of both rudder and main foil is awesome. A huge step in the right direction for the recreational sailor - and something I hadn't really comprehended until now - so thanks. But do you really believe the AC programs could learn something from the GC geometry?

That is a rather fantastic claim.

#62 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 25 April 2014 - 12:17 PM

 

 


The GC32 foils are significantly advanced over the foils used in the AC for the purpose of making a fast, easy to sail foiler-which ,apparently, they have succeded at. The Hydros C Cat foils have more in common with the AC boats and Groupama foils more in common with the Flying Phantom and GC 32. And Groupama won in head to head competition!

 
 
Doug,
 
That is such a ridiculous comparison that I probably shouldn't even being responding...
 
The AC boats could have made more stable foils, but they didn't because it wasn't fast.  Go back and watch footage of the TNZ vs. LR races.  LR was extremely stable, but that came at a price.  The dynamic behavior of big boats vs. small is completely different and requires different solutions.  In the case of the GC32, it makes complete sense to go the direction they have...to harp on about it being revolutionary is a stretch...
 
The fact is what they have done is quite significant in taking the same basic configuration used in the AC and refining it to the point that there is very little to no foil adjustment required when on the foils. If you don't understand that you're missing a big part of the story of state of the art foil development. The comparison I made was between foils with little "uptip" angle to foils with lots of uptip angle and it is a very valid comparison-I guess you didn't understand that either?
Based on what you said I agree 100%,,,,
interesting - because when I watch the GC foil it reminds me completely of LR. Watching LR foil was like a kid on a trike - so much stability it looked like a tripod.

Minimal adjustment of both rudder and main foil is awesome. A huge step in the right direction for the recreational sailor - and something I hadn't really comprehended until now - so thanks. But do you really believe the AC programs could learn something from the GC geometry?

That is a rather fantastic claim.

 

Floater, I never made such a claim. But, the AC guys taught these other guys about the basics of the uptip foil and now some of them have taken that foil design one step further and much closer to a "set it and forget it" foil. Whether thats of any benefit to an AC boat is an open question, but probably not. The AC guys will use the solution that is fastest-not necessarily the easiest to sail.

Many of the rest of us,however, will benefit from the refinement of the TNZ concept illustrated by the Flying Phantom and especially the GC32.



#63 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,764 posts

Posted 25 April 2014 - 02:26 PM

 

Out of interest, I looked into the numbers doing national titles in four major English speaking sailing nations (USA, Australia, UK, NZ). The number of total entries in existing mono classes that use foils (N12, R, 14*) have dropped by about 1/3. Of the three full-foiling mono classes that have existed one is showing strong growth in one country (and significant growth in many other countries), one has died (RS600ff), and the other (the Kiwi R Class) has had its fleet halved since the first foils arrived (although external issues are a factor).

 

The full-foiling classes seem to have grown by 45 boats in about a decade, across four countries. That's not huge considering the publicity, the brilliance of some of the Moths, and the fact that Bladerider allegedly lost a couple of mill in what could well have been the biggest and best promotion campaign of a high-end racing dinghy ever done.

 

In that time, in at least one country there has been a rise in the overall national title attendance (non-foilers and non foilers alike) by about 17% in the UK with a major increase in the number of plastic boats, but I haven't got that figure for the other countries. If other countries echo the UK then the rise in full foilers across all classes is only about 15 boats more than the growth one would expect in those classes even if they had not gone to foiling. 

 

These are not complete figures, but they do seem to indicate pretty clearly that a "trickle down** " of foiling is not necessarily a boon for a class. The full foilers are still only about 1% of boats doing nationals in the country that has the biggest national fleets.

 

Fun to sail? Yep. Something that will come to the masses and change the wide fact of sailing participation forever? Hmmmm....

 

* UK Cherub not included as I'm not sure of foil use but since their numbers are fairly small it doesn't change the overall issue much)

 

** I say "trickle down" in quotes because of course most of the things the AC highlighted, like foils, wings and cats, actually started in small boats, so it's really a "trickle up and then back down".

 

Wow, talk about a hell of a lot of effort that means nothing.

 

Trickle down from AC34 would be starting since the AC boats were developed, and would only be relevant with respect to multi-hulls since mono-hulls do not lend themselves to the same technology.  Rather than putting so much effort into analysis of historic development, prior to AC34, of boats that are not relevant, it might be better to just watch and see how interest in foiling, paired with ongoing development employing new concepts developed in AC34 (and the self-regulating foils really did not have any significant life before AC34) ends up translating to more foiling for the consumer sailing world (from dinghy to yacht). 

 

I find it interesting that many want to poo-poo the very idea that foiling could take off rather than being interested in how the potential of something that so dramatically improves performance can translate to the consumer sailing world.  But since most of the sailing world wants their boats to go faster, no matter what kind of boat (I have never heard anyone say they want their boat to be slower), it seems like it would be reasonable to hope for new advancements to somehow translate to as much of the sailing world as possible.  And if it does not relate to the kind of boat you are interested in, why be invested in poo-pooing its potential in the rest of the sailing world?

 

When there is a decade or so of evidence proving that only a tiny proportion of the world's sailors have moved to foiling despite the fact that it has been setting new performance standards for years it is certainly relevant to the issue of whether the AC "trickle down" has the potential to change multihull sailing forever in a major way, as claimed. How can you predict where we could go if you ignore where we have been and where we are?

 

I am not in any way poo-pooing foiling, which is why I clearly said that foiling is fun and can lead to fantastic performance. The fact that you or I or anyone else enjoys it is great, but that doesn't mean that so many people will take it up that it will necessarily change multihull sailing in a major way - or in a good way. I enjoyed the days of televised pro windsailing when I got to hang upside-down above the waves competing with the world's best paid pros in front of thousands of spectators too, but that whole scene crashed because everyone got caught up in the hype and ignored the reality.

 

Most of the sailing world isn't actually that concerned about making their boats go much faster in absolute terms - that's why Lasers have always outsold Canoes, why boats like the Lightning, Snipe and Enterprise are vastly more popular than skiffs,and why Hobie 16s and Darts are vastly more popular than F16s. 

 

I am concerned that there is evidence that moving a sport further towards performance at the expense of accessibility will harm its overall popularity. Most of the popular and growing sports are those in which even the pros use fairly cheap and accessible gear and sailing has been losing that, and losing numbers. This is NOT attacking development or high-performance classes, it's simply a reference to the issues that could be solved. I do feel that there are many more people who ignore the issues who come from the USA. That sort of thinking could be one reason why sailing is doing so poorly there.

 

I'm not poo-pooing anything - I'm just trying to look at the reality because it's a better way to solve issues than shutting our eyes to them. 

 

Total and complete hogwash.

 

EVERYONE wants their boat to go faster.  HOWEVER, that desire is always balanced by cost, by keeping things simple, by desires for other things (on-board comfort and luxuries), etc.  If a boat owner, or potential boat owner, had the option between two boats at equal cost, both with all the same features and same challenge to sail, except one is faster than the other, you know damned well which boat 99.9% would choose.

 

You have consistently tried to push the same painful logic, that speed does not matter.  And now, you are trying to argue that totally different foiling in the past, and its limited success in transferring to consumer sailing means that the HUGE innovations in foiling from AC34 will not trickle down.  But the thing is, that the innovations in foiling from AC34 are more related to their simplifying the process of foiling rather than innovations that improve the top speed of the foiling.  These innovations eliminate the need for complex mechanical systems such as wands, as well as eliminating the need to manage another system related to adjustable rudder planes for ride height.  These innovations lend themselves extremely well to catamarans, and rather than making them harder to sail, they make them easier to sail . . . . something that can't be said of earlier foiling applications.  Well, for the significant number of folks that do like catamarans, it is largely due to their substantially higher performance compared to monohulls, and the new foils are certainly going to be of interest (both for their improved speed and boat handling) if their costs can be brought down into reasonable range.  Ignoring that, implying that the limited success of previous foil technology speaks to lack of desirability to foil, is ignoring human nature. 

 

Time will tell.  I'm not saying all boats will be foiling.  Many/most will prefer non-foiling . . . whether it is because they just want more stuff on their boats for their particular interest, or because the cost is prohibitive, or because of a whole host of other things.  But for those who want high performance boats, the allure of getting out of the water and going faster will be extremely attractive, particularly if it comes along with a better handling boat.  At that point, the biggest factor will be cost.



#64 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 25 April 2014 - 05:06 PM

 

 

Out of interest, I looked into the numbers doing national titles in four major English speaking sailing nations (USA, Australia, UK, NZ). The number of total entries in existing mono classes that use foils (N12, R, 14*) have dropped by about 1/3. Of the three full-foiling mono classes that have existed one is showing strong growth in one country (and significant growth in many other countries), one has died (RS600ff), and the other (the Kiwi R Class) has had its fleet halved since the first foils arrived (although external issues are a factor).

 

The full-foiling classes seem to have grown by 45 boats in about a decade, across four countries. That's not huge considering the publicity, the brilliance of some of the Moths, and the fact that Bladerider allegedly lost a couple of mill in what could well have been the biggest and best promotion campaign of a high-end racing dinghy ever done.

 

In that time, in at least one country there has been a rise in the overall national title attendance (non-foilers and non foilers alike) by about 17% in the UK with a major increase in the number of plastic boats, but I haven't got that figure for the other countries. If other countries echo the UK then the rise in full foilers across all classes is only about 15 boats more than the growth one would expect in those classes even if they had not gone to foiling. 

 

These are not complete figures, but they do seem to indicate pretty clearly that a "trickle down** " of foiling is not necessarily a boon for a class. The full foilers are still only about 1% of boats doing nationals in the country that has the biggest national fleets.

 

Fun to sail? Yep. Something that will come to the masses and change the wide fact of sailing participation forever? Hmmmm....

 

* UK Cherub not included as I'm not sure of foil use but since their numbers are fairly small it doesn't change the overall issue much)

 

** I say "trickle down" in quotes because of course most of the things the AC highlighted, like foils, wings and cats, actually started in small boats, so it's really a "trickle up and then back down".

 

Wow, talk about a hell of a lot of effort that means nothing.

 

Trickle down from AC34 would be starting since the AC boats were developed, and would only be relevant with respect to multi-hulls since mono-hulls do not lend themselves to the same technology.  Rather than putting so much effort into analysis of historic development, prior to AC34, of boats that are not relevant, it might be better to just watch and see how interest in foiling, paired with ongoing development employing new concepts developed in AC34 (and the self-regulating foils really did not have any significant life before AC34) ends up translating to more foiling for the consumer sailing world (from dinghy to yacht). 

 

I find it interesting that many want to poo-poo the very idea that foiling could take off rather than being interested in how the potential of something that so dramatically improves performance can translate to the consumer sailing world.  But since most of the sailing world wants their boats to go faster, no matter what kind of boat (I have never heard anyone say they want their boat to be slower), it seems like it would be reasonable to hope for new advancements to somehow translate to as much of the sailing world as possible.  And if it does not relate to the kind of boat you are interested in, why be invested in poo-pooing its potential in the rest of the sailing world?

 

When there is a decade or so of evidence proving that only a tiny proportion of the world's sailors have moved to foiling despite the fact that it has been setting new performance standards for years it is certainly relevant to the issue of whether the AC "trickle down" has the potential to change multihull sailing forever in a major way, as claimed. How can you predict where we could go if you ignore where we have been and where we are?

 

I am not in any way poo-pooing foiling, which is why I clearly said that foiling is fun and can lead to fantastic performance. The fact that you or I or anyone else enjoys it is great, but that doesn't mean that so many people will take it up that it will necessarily change multihull sailing in a major way - or in a good way. I enjoyed the days of televised pro windsailing when I got to hang upside-down above the waves competing with the world's best paid pros in front of thousands of spectators too, but that whole scene crashed because everyone got caught up in the hype and ignored the reality.

 

Most of the sailing world isn't actually that concerned about making their boats go much faster in absolute terms - that's why Lasers have always outsold Canoes, why boats like the Lightning, Snipe and Enterprise are vastly more popular than skiffs,and why Hobie 16s and Darts are vastly more popular than F16s. 

 

I am concerned that there is evidence that moving a sport further towards performance at the expense of accessibility will harm its overall popularity. Most of the popular and growing sports are those in which even the pros use fairly cheap and accessible gear and sailing has been losing that, and losing numbers. This is NOT attacking development or high-performance classes, it's simply a reference to the issues that could be solved. I do feel that there are many more people who ignore the issues who come from the USA. That sort of thinking could be one reason why sailing is doing so poorly there.

 

I'm not poo-pooing anything - I'm just trying to look at the reality because it's a better way to solve issues than shutting our eyes to them. 

 

Total and complete hogwash.

 

EVERYONE wants their boat to go faster.  HOWEVER, that desire is always balanced by cost, by keeping things simple, by desires for other things (on-board comfort and luxuries), etc.  If a boat owner, or potential boat owner, had the option between two boats at equal cost, both with all the same features and same challenge to sail, except one is faster than the other, you know damned well which boat 99.9% would choose.

 

You have consistently tried to push the same painful logic, that speed does not matter.  And now, you are trying to argue that totally different foiling in the past, and its limited success in transferring to consumer sailing means that the HUGE innovations in foiling from AC34 will not trickle down.  But the thing is, that the innovations in foiling from AC34 are more related to their simplifying the process of foiling rather than innovations that improve the top speed of the foiling.  These innovations eliminate the need for complex mechanical systems such as wands, as well as eliminating the need to manage another system related to adjustable rudder planes for ride height.  These innovations lend themselves extremely well to catamarans, and rather than making them harder to sail, they make them easier to sail . . . . something that can't be said of earlier foiling applications.  Well, for the significant number of folks that do like catamarans, it is largely due to their substantially higher performance compared to monohulls, and the new foils are certainly going to be of interest (both for their improved speed and boat handling) if their costs can be brought down into reasonable range.  Ignoring that, implying that the limited success of previous foil technology speaks to lack of desirability to foil, is ignoring human nature. 

 

Time will tell.  I'm not saying all boats will be foiling.  Many/most will prefer non-foiling . . . whether it is because they just want more stuff on their boats for their particular interest, or because the cost is prohibitive, or because of a whole host of other things.  But for those who want high performance boats, the allure of getting out of the water and going faster will be extremely attractive, particularly if it comes along with a better handling boat.  At that point, the biggest factor will be cost.

 

Very well said!



#65 Clipper

Clipper

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 478 posts

Posted 25 April 2014 - 09:16 PM

In the open multi fleet racing in Auckland, of which 6-7 boats is a normal sized fleet, there are 3 SL33s with folks racing around. Maybe 4?

Definitely don't quote me on numbers, but it's not much of a stretch to expect half the small fleet on any given day to be foilers. Not counting the tris with curved foils on the amas.

It looks like serious trickle down to me.

#66 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,764 posts

Posted 25 April 2014 - 09:24 PM

In the open multi fleet racing in Auckland, of which 6-7 boats is a normal sized fleet, there are 3 SL33s with folks racing around. Maybe 4?

Definitely don't quote me on numbers, but it's not much of a stretch to expect half the small fleet on any given day to be foilers. Not counting the tris with curved foils on the amas.

It looks like serious trickle down to me.

You must be mistaken.  People don't like to go fast.

;)



#67 nav

nav

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,451 posts

Posted 25 April 2014 - 10:10 PM

 

 

>Google tells us that there are 3.99 million people reading this site that aren't you ...  or the couple hundred other whiny, shiteating, useless, sniping cocks that make the SA forums such a douchebaggish place..... Why do YOU think YOU count for anything besides somewhere for me to flick my ash?
(Clean,  12/19/2013)

 

I had not seen that.  Yikes.  I nice way to treat his customers.

 

If you're not paying, you're the product rather than the customer!
 

In a advertiser-sponsored site, we are the equivalent of customers.  We go away, his advertisers go away.  We and the advertisers can be seen as one.

 

May be you're right, (by the way is it advertiser sponsored or pay per click or both?), but if you are one of the 377, are you still 'a customer' like the 14,019?

(just the  thread that happened to be at the top when I looked)

 

apologies for thread-jack
 



#68 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,833 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 26 April 2014 - 05:35 AM

In the open multi fleet racing in Auckland, of which 6-7 boats is a normal sized fleet, there are 3 SL33s with folks racing around. Maybe 4?

I'm impressed but where else in the world does anything like that happen? Lake Geneva I know. Where else?

#69 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,261 posts

Posted 26 April 2014 - 06:30 AM

Wait till PHRF gets a hold of the foilers :) 



#70 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,442 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 26 April 2014 - 05:41 PM


In the open multi fleet racing in Auckland, of which 6-7 boats is a normal sized fleet, there are 3 SL33s with folks racing around. Maybe 4?

I'm impressed but where else in the world does anything like that happen? Lake Geneva I know. Where else?
not SF. Cats attracted to hot sun, warm water, flat water - and preferably a nice beach too (or at least any of the above).

That said, we do have a WETA fleet that I intend to join - ostensibly with the intention of fun and safe sailing with the kids - enhanced by the simplicity of the craft.

But the recent surge in foiling has me wondering if even the WETA might be headed to a premature extinction.

#71 aslongastheyreallthesame

aslongastheyreallthesame

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 187 posts

Posted 26 April 2014 - 06:31 PM

The best and fastest trickle-down I have ever experienced - and I am not being entirely facetious here - is the idea to store the Tupperware containers with their lids on as opposed to stacked with lids separate.

 

GENIUS!

 

This was on the front page posting (IIRC) from a recent Cup competitor returned home to NZ between gigs.

 

THANK YOU for this marvelous translation of Cup thinking to our family. You have saved me many aggravated minutes, and over the long run you may have saved a marriage! :)

 

WELL DONE.

 

Oh and it's pretty amazing to read stories of mere mortals being able to drive foiling cats. Wow.



#72 atefooterz

atefooterz

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,841 posts
  • Location:Aus 2154
  • Interests:many

Posted 26 April 2014 - 06:48 PM

 

For the legion AC fans that boycott the FP - I say boycott no more - for Clean has seen the light.


I'm sorry, but as far as I'm concerned Clean is permanently blacklisted - due to an exceedingly loutish (even by his standards) comment he made sometime ago. Trouble is, I don't remember what it was about any more, although I did copy it somewhere ..

Edit: found it

>Google tells us that there are 3.99 million people reading this site that aren't you ...  or the couple hundred other whiny, shiteating, useless, sniping cocks that make the SA forums such a douchebaggish place..... Why do YOU think YOU count for anything besides somewhere for me to flick my ash?
(Clean,  12/19

/2013)

 

I had not seen that.  Yikes.  I nice way to treat his customers.

 

Consider yourselves to be unpaid contributors rather than customers, as there is no shortage of those wishing to contribute how can a bit of tough love hurt when there are many more willing to fill the void with opinions?



#73 Amati

Amati

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,666 posts
  • Location:Yes!
  • Interests:0 (t) = 0

Posted 26 April 2014 - 07:02 PM

1-  Clean is an amateur delivering the heavy metal

 

 

 

 

2-  There are stable ways to foil when rool foolin' isn't afoot;

 

Attached File  NewDesign Osprey from Hydrosail LLC.jpg   4.28K   3 downloads

 

It was exciting watching the AC wondering if there was another stuff coming.  I guess that's trickledown....



#74 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,442 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 26 April 2014 - 08:48 PM

I am concerned that there is evidence that moving a sport further towards performance at the expense of accessibility will harm its overall popularity. Most of the popular and growing sports are those in which even the pros use fairly cheap and accessible gear and sailing has been losing that, and losing numbers.

I would say you have got to the crux of the issue: Expense and accessibility. Which should have some correlation to simplicity. If the technology becomes simple, accessible, affordable - but especially breeds a boat with attractive sailing characteristics - something new will be born.

And it looks like a gold rush is on to midwife this new technology. Of course it could peter out to nothing - but maybe not. The GC makes one wonder if they have already cracked the code.

#75 pwormwood

pwormwood

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 95 posts
  • Location:Palmetto, FL USA
  • Interests:performance sailing...LIVING life...

Posted 27 April 2014 - 01:06 PM

Time certainly gives you perspective - I remember when racing multihulls came on the scene 40-50 years ago.  The conversation and comments looked pretty much exactly like what we're seeing with foiling today - the inevitable shift to the next technology, resisted by those with skin of some sort in the existing game.  In catamarans' case, it was 'trickle up' to bigger and bigger boats, while trying to earn the respect and acceptance of our sailing peers.  With foiling, it looks like a quick trickle up from moths and the work of guys like Sam Bradford to the AC boats; and now it is starting trickling back down and disseminate through sailing consciousness with marketable products like the Phantom, GC32 and SL33.  I jumped into cats early, and would be jumping into foils, if I didn't have a body that is old enough to remember sailing 40-50 years ago...I can still handle the ride - it's the crashes that take too long to recover from now...



#76 Chris 249

Chris 249

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,486 posts

Posted 28 April 2014 - 12:59 AM

Time certainly gives you perspective - I remember when racing multihulls came on the scene 40-50 years ago.  The conversation and comments looked pretty much exactly like what we're seeing with foiling today - the inevitable shift to the next technology, resisted by those with skin of some sort in the existing game.  In catamarans' case, it was 'trickle up' to bigger and bigger boats, while trying to earn the respect and acceptance of our sailing peers.  With foiling, it looks like a quick trickle up from moths and the work of guys like Sam Bradford to the AC boats; and now it is starting trickling back down and disseminate through sailing consciousness with marketable products like the Phantom, GC32 and SL33.  I jumped into cats early, and would be jumping into foils, if I didn't have a body that is old enough to remember sailing 40-50 years ago...I can still handle the ride - it's the crashes that take too long to recover from now...

 
But in both cases (foilers and multis) where are these apparently unwarranted "conversation and comments" and where is the "inevitable shift to the next technology"? 
 
My family got into multis almost 50 years ago and I have read the writings of the pioneers like Piver, Choy and Tchetet (sp). To the extent that there was a backlash against the boats they pioneered, a lot of it may have been caused by the fact that they were over-selling and over-hyping their own boats and slinging shit at others. 
 
Take Piver's writings. He claimed that a Piver could surf around the entire world on one wave! He claimed that one of his 1960s 27 footers could carry full sail in 60 knots of wind at 35 mph - faster than the builders of your vastly faster and newer boats claim that your boats could do. Even someone who greatly respects Piver, namely Jim Brown, says that Piver's "bombastic" hype may have been so extreme that it hurt the multihull cause. Others have claimed that all monos have been "obsolete" for years. 
 
It's perfectly understandable that Piver and others wanted to get the whole world excited about these fantastic boats, but it's also perfectly understandable that a lot of people got annoyed and called "bullshit!" when they exaggerated so much.  Calling bullshit on such crap is not being anti-progress, it's being pro-truth.
 
And the simple fact is that there is nothing "inevitable" about a shift to the next technology - for example there has NOT been a major shift towards the "new technology" of multis. In fact at the regatta this weekend some F16 sailors were saying that cat sailing was on its way out because kids were not interested. I don't agree with that but the numbers I am collecting certainly show that there is no big move towards small cat racing. It's an example of the fact that there is certainly no "inevitable shift" to multis, there was no "inevitable shift" to the new technology of windsurfers, and therefore there is no reason to say that there is any major "inevitable shift" to foiling (although it's obviously a great minority part of the sport).
 
 
The analogy with some of the extreme hyping of foilers may be similar. Sure, they are fantastic in many ways, just like multis. I don't think anyone has said that they are not. But there are many fantastic craft out there that have not "trickled down" widely into the general sailing scene and all that some of us are saying is that the same may happen with foiling.

#77 Chris 249

Chris 249

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,486 posts

Posted 28 April 2014 - 01:22 AM

 

Total and complete hogwash.

 

EVERYONE wants their boat to go faster.  HOWEVER, that desire is always balanced by cost, by keeping things simple, by desires for other things (on-board comfort and luxuries), etc.  If a boat owner, or potential boat owner, had the option between two boats at equal cost, both with all the same features and same challenge to sail, except one is faster than the other, you know damned well which boat 99.9% would choose.

 

You have consistently tried to push the same painful logic, that speed does not matter.  And now, you are trying to argue that totally different foiling in the past, and its limited success in transferring to consumer sailing means that the HUGE innovations in foiling from AC34 will not trickle down.  But the thing is, that the innovations in foiling from AC34 are more related to their simplifying the process of foiling rather than innovations that improve the top speed of the foiling.  These innovations eliminate the need for complex mechanical systems such as wands, as well as eliminating the need to manage another system related to adjustable rudder planes for ride height.  These innovations lend themselves extremely well to catamarans, and rather than making them harder to sail, they make them easier to sail . . . . something that can't be said of earlier foiling applications.  Well, for the significant number of folks that do like catamarans, it is largely due to their substantially higher performance compared to monohulls, and the new foils are certainly going to be of interest (both for their improved speed and boat handling) if their costs can be brought down into reasonable range.  Ignoring that, implying that the limited success of previous foil technology speaks to lack of desirability to foil, is ignoring human nature. 

 

Time will tell.  I'm not saying all boats will be foiling.  Many/most will prefer non-foiling . . . whether it is because they just want more stuff on their boats for their particular interest, or because the cost is prohibitive, or because of a whole host of other things.  But for those who want high performance boats, the allure of getting out of the water and going faster will be extremely attractive, particularly if it comes along with a better handling boat.  At that point, the biggest factor will be cost.

 

If everyone wants their boat to go faster, why is the slow Dragon the most popular keelboat internationally, when their owners could spend a lot less and get a multi?

 

If everyone wants their boat to go faster, why do more people race Lasers, Solos and Sabres than Moths (foiler or seahugger) or windsurfers? Why do more people race Hobie 16s and Dart 18s than A Class and F16s?

 

Are you seriously saying that Melges owners could not afford a faster Stilleto cat or Farrier tri instead?

 

No, I don't damn well know that most people would choose the faster boat because I know what they do choose. A vast amount of them pay more and go through more inconvenience to own slower craft. I personally love fast gear (my fastest stuff is still quicker than a Moth, whereas IIRC you sail ballasted monos which seems to disprove your claim that people prefer speed) but most people don't; they get scared and it's not just for them.

 

It's not me who is ignoring human nature; I'm the one who has been at class meetings of high-performance cat classes where the overwhelming vote has been AGAINST alterations that made the boat go faster. Even the Tornado class voted against going faster and only went for the "Sport" rig when ISAF told them to. The A Class threads here show that even many current A owners do NOT want the extra speed that foiling offers. That is human nature at work.

 

Sure, lots of people DO like going faster. That's great. So are foilers and other high performance craft. I own and have done well in some pretty rapid small singlehanders and I love them - if I was biased it would be towards fast kit.

 

But the facts are clear and simple in that the boats that people choose show that most of them don't seem to really worry about pure speed all that much. Some of the people who don't worry about speed much would get a faster boat if all else was equal, but we can tell from what people sail that most of them rate convenience, economy, fleet size and similar factors much higher than speed. If they rated speed at No 1 then Moths, 18 Squares, skiffs and kiteboards would be biggest racing fleets but instead it's Lasers, Thistles, Js, etc.

 

But since you can't have a conversation without resorting to paper tigers and straw men, it's not worth continuing this discussion. 



#78 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,764 posts

Posted 28 April 2014 - 03:07 AM

 

 

Total and complete hogwash.

 

EVERYONE wants their boat to go faster.  HOWEVER, that desire is always balanced by cost, by keeping things simple, by desires for other things (on-board comfort and luxuries), etc.  If a boat owner, or potential boat owner, had the option between two boats at equal cost, both with all the same features and same challenge to sail, except one is faster than the other, you know damned well which boat 99.9% would choose.

 

You have consistently tried to push the same painful logic, that speed does not matter.  And now, you are trying to argue that totally different foiling in the past, and its limited success in transferring to consumer sailing means that the HUGE innovations in foiling from AC34 will not trickle down.  But the thing is, that the innovations in foiling from AC34 are more related to their simplifying the process of foiling rather than innovations that improve the top speed of the foiling.  These innovations eliminate the need for complex mechanical systems such as wands, as well as eliminating the need to manage another system related to adjustable rudder planes for ride height.  These innovations lend themselves extremely well to catamarans, and rather than making them harder to sail, they make them easier to sail . . . . something that can't be said of earlier foiling applications.  Well, for the significant number of folks that do like catamarans, it is largely due to their substantially higher performance compared to monohulls, and the new foils are certainly going to be of interest (both for their improved speed and boat handling) if their costs can be brought down into reasonable range.  Ignoring that, implying that the limited success of previous foil technology speaks to lack of desirability to foil, is ignoring human nature. 

 

Time will tell.  I'm not saying all boats will be foiling.  Many/most will prefer non-foiling . . . whether it is because they just want more stuff on their boats for their particular interest, or because the cost is prohibitive, or because of a whole host of other things.  But for those who want high performance boats, the allure of getting out of the water and going faster will be extremely attractive, particularly if it comes along with a better handling boat.  At that point, the biggest factor will be cost.

 

If everyone wants their boat to go faster, why is the slow Dragon the most popular keelboat internationally, when their owners could spend a lot less and get a multi?

 

If everyone wants their boat to go faster, why do more people race Lasers, Solos and Sabres than Moths (foiler or seahugger) or windsurfers? Why do more people race Hobie 16s and Dart 18s than A Class and F16s?

 

Are you seriously saying that Melges owners could not afford a faster Stilleto cat or Farrier tri instead?

 

No, I don't damn well know that most people would choose the faster boat because I know what they do choose. A vast amount of them pay more and go through more inconvenience to own slower craft. I personally love fast gear (my fastest stuff is still quicker than a Moth, whereas IIRC you sail ballasted monos which seems to disprove your claim that people prefer speed) but most people don't; they get scared and it's not just for them.

 

It's not me who is ignoring human nature; I'm the one who has been at class meetings of high-performance cat classes where the overwhelming vote has been AGAINST alterations that made the boat go faster. Even the Tornado class voted against going faster and only went for the "Sport" rig when ISAF told them to. The A Class threads here show that even many current A owners do NOT want the extra speed that foiling offers. That is human nature at work.

 

Sure, lots of people DO like going faster. That's great. So are foilers and other high performance craft. I own and have done well in some pretty rapid small singlehanders and I love them - if I was biased it would be towards fast kit.

 

But the facts are clear and simple in that the boats that people choose show that most of them don't seem to really worry about pure speed all that much. Some of the people who don't worry about speed much would get a faster boat if all else was equal, but we can tell from what people sail that most of them rate convenience, economy, fleet size and similar factors much higher than speed. If they rated speed at No 1 then Moths, 18 Squares, skiffs and kiteboards would be biggest racing fleets but instead it's Lasers, Thistles, Js, etc.

 

But since you can't have a conversation without resorting to paper tigers and straw men, it's not worth continuing this discussion. 

 

 

It's only not worth continuing the conversation if you are going to continue ignoring the points others are making and twisting those words in a silly effort to "prove" your point. 

 

What I clearly said was that there are a great deal of factors that lead any person to logically chose a boat.  They include crew/gear capacity, set-up/operating complexity, storage/moorage/transportation, sea-worthiness, COST, etc..  AND OF COURSE, SPEED.   But for 99.9%, it is a trade off / balancing act of which of these things a prospective owner can handle and what they desire.  But NO ONE says they picked X boat because it was slower than Y boat, for that reason alone.  Just as no one intentionally rips holes in their sails or intentionally grows barnacles on their boat hulls.  People logically want to go as fast as they can while also achieving their other desires.  If someone wants a boat that takes up next to no room and can be put together and sailed in minutes with the easiest of operation, then they are not going to get a boat that misses on those points but is really fast.  However, if there are two options that meet all of those needs, first, but one is faster than the other at no extra cost, then 99.99% will pick the faster boat.  To take your examples:

 

Lasers, Solos and Sabres as WAY cheaper and easier to sail than Moths (foiler or seahugger) and are easier to sail and have more capacity than windsurfers.

 

Hobie 16s and Dart 18s cost a fraction of A Class and F16s, as well as being easier to sail.

 

A Melges, again, is easier to sail and offers easier logistics and other factors compared to a Stilleto cat or Farrier tri.

 

But guess what, there are a lot of people that still want the Moths, sailboards/kite boards, A-Class & F16s, Stilletos, and Farriers.  It takes more money, it takes more work, it takes more practice to sail them, but the reward is more excitement, which for them is more important than the factors that make others opt for the lower performance boats. 

 

But again, if someone has two boats to choose between which are identical in all factors but performance (meaning they are the same in cost, size/capacity, complexity, difficulty, etc.), 99.9999% are going to pick the boat that can go faster.

 

So, now that we already have a significant owners of multi-hulls out there that have balanced their interests and opted for those higher performance boats, if the advances from AC34 continue to show promise in making the operation of the boats easier while also improving performance, and if the cost can be kept down, it is the utmost in absurdity to claim that it won't trickle down because of some deluded thinking that performance does not matter.

 

Yikes!



#79 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,261 posts

Posted 28 April 2014 - 03:29 AM

Time certainly gives you perspective - I remember when racing multihulls came on the scene 40-50 years ago.  The conversation and comments looked pretty much exactly like what we're seeing with foiling today - the inevitable shift to the next technology, resisted by those with skin of some sort in the existing game.  In catamarans' case, it was 'trickle up' to bigger and bigger boats, while trying to earn the respect and acceptance of our sailing peers.  With foiling, it looks like a quick trickle up from moths and the work of guys like Sam Bradford to the AC boats; and now it is starting trickling back down and disseminate through sailing consciousness with marketable products like the Phantom, GC32 and SL33.  I jumped into cats early, and would be jumping into foils, if I didn't have a body that is old enough to remember sailing 40-50 years ago...I can still handle the ride - it's the crashes that take too long to recover from now...

 
But in both cases (foilers and multis) where are these apparently unwarranted "conversation and comments" and where is the "inevitable shift to the next technology"? 
 
My family got into multis almost 50 years ago and I have read the writings of the pioneers like Piver, Choy and Tchetet (sp). To the extent that there was a backlash against the boats they pioneered, a lot of it may have been caused by the fact that they were over-selling and over-hyping their own boats and slinging shit at others. 
 
Take Piver's writings. He claimed that a Piver could surf around the entire world on one wave! He claimed that one of his 1960s 27 footers could carry full sail in 60 knots of wind at 35 mph - faster than the builders of your vastly faster and newer boats claim that your boats could do. Even someone who greatly respects Piver, namely Jim Brown, says that Piver's "bombastic" hype may have been so extreme that it hurt the multihull cause. Others have claimed that all monos have been "obsolete" for years. 
 
It's perfectly understandable that Piver and others wanted to get the whole world excited about these fantastic boats, but it's also perfectly understandable that a lot of people got annoyed and called "bullshit!" when they exaggerated so much.  Calling bullshit on such crap is not being anti-progress, it's being pro-truth.
 And the simple fact is that there is nothing "inevitable" about a shift to the next technology - for example there has NOT been a major shift towards the "new technology" of multis. In fact at the regatta this weekend some F16 sailors were saying that cat sailing was on its way out because kids were not interested. I don't agree with that but the numbers I am collecting certainly show that there is no big move towards small cat racing. It's an example of the fact that there is certainly no "inevitable shift" to multis, there was no "inevitable shift" to the new technology of windsurfers, and therefore there is no reason to say that there is any major "inevitable shift" to foiling (although it's obviously a great minority part of the sport).
 
 
The analogy with some of the extreme hyping of foilers may be similar. Sure, they are fantastic in many ways, just like multis. I don't think anyone has said that they are not. But there are many fantastic craft out there that have not "trickled down" widely into the general sailing scene and all that some of us are saying is that the same may happen with foiling.

I do see your point and agree that speed is not everything . The question was posed if two boats were similar in everything but speed that most people would chose the faster boat . Well this might be true by those people looking to get out by themselves and have a bit of fun . Those looking to compete and race other like boats would weigh HEAVILY the local fleets as to what they would pick . I'm not just talking just one design , I am also talking about fleets of similarly rated boats IE the PHRF etc. Can you imagine the owner of his brand new flying boat going before the local rating board ? " so let me get this straight your boat does what downwind ? "

The first buyers of any foiling boat will be playing with themselves for a long long time until there are enough for their own starts as they will most likely never find a handicap rating system that will make sence .

#80 Chris 249

Chris 249

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,486 posts

Posted 28 April 2014 - 05:38 AM

It's only not worth continuing the conversation if you are going to continue ignoring the points others are making and twisting those words in a silly effort to "prove" your point. 
 
What I clearly said was that there are a great deal of factors that lead any person to logically chose a boat.  They include crew/gear capacity, set-up/operating complexity, storage/moorage/transportation, sea-worthiness, COST, etc..  AND OF COURSE, SPEED.   But for 99.9%, it is a trade off / balancing act of which of these things a prospective owner can handle and what they desire.  But NO ONE says they picked X boat because it was slower than Y boat, for that reason alone.  Just as no one intentionally rips holes in their sails or intentionally grows barnacles on their boat hulls.  People logically want to go as fast as they can while also achieving their other desires.  If someone wants a boat that takes up next to no room and can be put together and sailed in minutes with the easiest of operation, then they are not going to get a boat that misses on those points but is really fast.  However, if there are two options that meet all of those needs, first, but one is faster than the other at no extra cost, then 99.99% will pick the faster boat.  To take your examples:
 
Lasers, Solos and Sabres as WAY cheaper and easier to sail than Moths (foiler or seahugger) and are easier to sail and have more capacity than windsurfers.
 
Hobie 16s and Dart 18s cost a fraction of A Class and F16s, as well as being easier to sail.
 
A Melges, again, is easier to sail and offers easier logistics and other factors compared to a Stilleto cat or Farrier tri.
 
But guess what, there are a lot of people that still want the Moths, sailboards/kite boards, A-Class & F16s, Stilletos, and Farriers.  It takes more money, it takes more work, it takes more practice to sail them, but the reward is more excitement, which for them is more important than the factors that make others opt for the lower performance boats. 
 
But again, if someone has two boats to choose between which are identical in all factors but performance (meaning they are the same in cost, size/capacity, complexity, difficulty, etc.), 99.9999% are going to pick the boat that can go faster.
 
So, now that we already have a significant owners of multi-hulls out there that have balanced their interests and opted for those higher performance boats, if the advances from AC34 continue to show promise in making the operation of the boats easier while also improving performance, and if the cost can be kept down, it is the utmost in absurdity to claim that it won't trickle down because of some deluded thinking that performance does not matter.
 
Yikes!

 
Our debate started with words being twisted, but not by me. Nowhere did I poo-poo foilers as you imply. Nowhere did I draw conclusions in black and white, as you imply, and say that foiling won't trickle down. Nowhere did I say that performance "doesn't matter". 

 

The delusion 'round here is from your mis-representation of what I said. Paper tigers, straw men.
 
I merely said that the evidence is that foiling has still not shown signs of become widely popular. I did say that most sailors are not "that concerned" about going faster, and for your own reasons you decided to read that as "most sailors are not at all concerned". Please don't blame me for the way you read stuff.
 
You keep on going on about the fact that people choose boats for a variety of reasons. I know that, I agree with that. The popular boats I referred to are normally currently cheaper than the fast ones (Moths have not always been more expensive than Lasers, people still buy Finns which are IIRC slower and more expensive than Moths) but many of those who buy them could easily afford faster craft, yet they choose not to. Many people choose them because of the challenge of the big fleets, so they are not all simply trying to get easier-to-sail craft. It's just that they don't rate pure speed very highly.
 
It may surprise you but yes, I do know that people sails Moths, F16 types and boards; I've had 'em (whereas if I recall correctly, you sail on other people's leadmines and mainly just write about fast craft instead of sailing them). The F16 remains a small class (T foils and all), the boards have dropped dramatically in popularity since they became high performance, and Moths are doing well. Those types are good examples of the point I was making, which is that foiling does not necessarily increase numbers in a class.

 

Even leaving aside the main point, saying what could happen if someone manages to make a foiler that is miraculously no harder to own, sail and afford than a non-foiler is not particularly relevant when it's pretty much accepted that foiling inherently adds some expense and complication. Even what is probably the cheapest set of boat foils (the Laser ones) add a considerable amount of expense and hassle.
 
I'm fascinated to learn that a Melges is easier to sail than a Farrier, by the way....Hmmm. The Farriers I have sailed were very tractable.



#81 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,764 posts

Posted 28 April 2014 - 03:30 PM

It's only not worth continuing the conversation if you are going to continue ignoring the points others are making and twisting those words in a silly effort to "prove" your point. 
 
What I clearly said was that there are a great deal of factors that lead any person to logically chose a boat.  They include crew/gear capacity, set-up/operating complexity, storage/moorage/transportation, sea-worthiness, COST, etc..  AND OF COURSE, SPEED.   But for 99.9%, it is a trade off / balancing act of which of these things a prospective owner can handle and what they desire.  But NO ONE says they picked X boat because it was slower than Y boat, for that reason alone.  Just as no one intentionally rips holes in their sails or intentionally grows barnacles on their boat hulls.  People logically want to go as fast as they can while also achieving their other desires.  If someone wants a boat that takes up next to no room and can be put together and sailed in minutes with the easiest of operation, then they are not going to get a boat that misses on those points but is really fast.  However, if there are two options that meet all of those needs, first, but one is faster than the other at no extra cost, then 99.99% will pick the faster boat.  To take your examples:
 
Lasers, Solos and Sabres as WAY cheaper and easier to sail than Moths (foiler or seahugger) and are easier to sail and have more capacity than windsurfers.
 
Hobie 16s and Dart 18s cost a fraction of A Class and F16s, as well as being easier to sail.
 
A Melges, again, is easier to sail and offers easier logistics and other factors compared to a Stilleto cat or Farrier tri.
 
But guess what, there are a lot of people that still want the Moths, sailboards/kite boards, A-Class & F16s, Stilletos, and Farriers.  It takes more money, it takes more work, it takes more practice to sail them, but the reward is more excitement, which for them is more important than the factors that make others opt for the lower performance boats. 
 
But again, if someone has two boats to choose between which are identical in all factors but performance (meaning they are the same in cost, size/capacity, complexity, difficulty, etc.), 99.9999% are going to pick the boat that can go faster.
 
So, now that we already have a significant owners of multi-hulls out there that have balanced their interests and opted for those higher performance boats, if the advances from AC34 continue to show promise in making the operation of the boats easier while also improving performance, and if the cost can be kept down, it is the utmost in absurdity to claim that it won't trickle down because of some deluded thinking that performance does not matter.
 
Yikes!

 
Our debate started with words being twisted, but not by me. Nowhere did I poo-poo foilers as you imply. Nowhere did I draw conclusions in black and white, as you imply, and say that foiling won't trickle down. Nowhere did I say that performance "doesn't matter". 

 

The delusion 'round here is from your mis-representation of what I said. Paper tigers, straw men.
 
I merely said that the evidence is that foiling has still not shown signs of become widely popular. I did say that most sailors are not "that concerned" about going faster, and for your own reasons you decided to read that as "most sailors are not at all concerned". Please don't blame me for the way you read stuff.
 
You keep on going on about the fact that people choose boats for a variety of reasons. I know that, I agree with that. The popular boats I referred to are normally currently cheaper than the fast ones (Moths have not always been more expensive than Lasers, people still buy Finns which are IIRC slower and more expensive than Moths) but many of those who buy them could easily afford faster craft, yet they choose not to. Many people choose them because of the challenge of the big fleets, so they are not all simply trying to get easier-to-sail craft. It's just that they don't rate pure speed very highly.
 
It may surprise you but yes, I do know that people sails Moths, F16 types and boards; I've had 'em (whereas if I recall correctly, you sail on other people's leadmines and mainly just write about fast craft instead of sailing them). The F16 remains a small class (T foils and all), the boards have dropped dramatically in popularity since they became high performance, and Moths are doing well. Those types are good examples of the point I was making, which is that foiling does not necessarily increase numbers in a class.

 

Even leaving aside the main point, saying what could happen if someone manages to make a foiler that is miraculously no harder to own, sail and afford than a non-foiler is not particularly relevant when it's pretty much accepted that foiling inherently adds some expense and complication. Even what is probably the cheapest set of boat foils (the Laser ones) add a considerable amount of expense and hassle.
 
I'm fascinated to learn that a Melges is easier to sail than a Farrier, by the way....Hmmm. The Farriers I have sailed were very tractable.

 

The thing is, you were using a bunch of historic foiling options as evidence to imply that the latest innovations from AC34 are not likely to have much of an impact on the sport.  This ignores that the ETNZ foils are most notable for their advance in ease of sailing and stability with LESS complexity, rather than their advance in speed.  Before the ETNZ foils, foiling was highly complex, both with regard to the engineering and mechanics, as well as with boat handling (one of the biggest considerations with many prospective boat owners), and they certainly were not seen as aiding stability.  When you combine your ignoring the difference in innovation with the ETNZ foils compared to past foiling applications to your consistent criticisms of AC34 and the your contention that people do not prefer to watch higher performance boats at the highest level of the sport. 

 

Now, one thing about sailing is that there is a great deal of innertia . . . meaning since it is one of the most expensive sports with regard to equipment, the "masses" are not able or likely to just be changing over to new boats all the time.  And since it is also the case that many like to be able to race in existing classes, rather than to have "no one to race", there is also resistance to newer boats.  But when discussing trickle down and advancement, I think you have to consider it on the basis of the influence on "modern boats", those that are leading sailing forward.

 

The ETNZ foil concept, particularly as seen in the GC32 and Flying Phantom, has the potential to provide massive performance and stability gains with relatively modest increase in cost.  It may be the case that the mechanics of adjustable foil boxes may not be that necessary or be very complex given larger V foils, which would make the added cost manageable.  If that is the case, and boat classes allow for the foils, the probability that the foils will have a substantial influence on these boat classes that attract those seeking higher performance and innovation is good.  But the main point, which is why I originally responded to you, is that the past "evidence" that foiling has not trickled down really means little relative to the AC34 innovations.  For us to be able to measure the trickle down from AC34, we need to just hold on and see how things shake out in the next couple of years.  I certainly don't KNOW that it can be done, but history tells me that innovation happens all the time, with things that previously cost a fortune now so cheap they are disposable. 

 

No "paper tigers" or straw men.



#82 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 28 April 2014 - 04:32 PM

Just want to try to clarify one point: when talking about stability one has to be careful. The great advance in the TNZ foils as refined by the GC32 and Flying Phantom teams is the incredible heave stability or altitude control. Many older foilers use systems that provided all the RM for the boat they were used on-hence great roll stability. Both older and newer foil systems have generally excellent pitch stability.

The newer foilers don't gain RM(or roll stability) from the foils as some older systems do(Rave, Osprey, Hobie Trifoiler) but the GC32 and Flying Phantom have heave stability nearly on a par with the best wand type altitude control systems which is quite an advance and refinement of the original TNZ foil system.

May the debate continue------



#83 SimonN

SimonN

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,047 posts
  • Location:Sydney ex London

Posted 29 April 2014 - 07:12 AM

Doug

 

I really don't see the GS32 and FP systems as a refinement of the TNZ system but more like the same thing at different ends of a spectrum. TNZ (and the other AC teams) could have gone for more V'ed foils and I am pretty sure that most of the final foils used were in fact more "open" (L like) than earlier iterations. They knew the trade off - more V and more heave control, less V and more need for manual intervention. However, for the AC teams, the most important thing was speed. As we saw, it was more important than heave stability (AC boats still had heave stability "moments"). With the GS32 and the FP, because they are one designs, they can afford to give up top end speed in exchange for near foolproof handling behavior. The second you are building to a development type rule, you start to push the other way because even small gains are worthwhile.

 

We also saw an understanding of this trade off with the C Class. When flying properly, Hydros was faster than Groupama, but Groupama got around the course faster. In thge A Class, the big question that is being considered is just how much heave stability you design into the foils and how much is achieved by the sailor, because based on current thinking, more inherent heave stability equals higher drag and lower speed.



#84 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 29 April 2014 - 01:47 PM

Whether it's a "refinement" or not the work done by the Phantom and GC32 guys has produced a foil system that is the equivalent of a wand based system in heave stability with no moving parts on the foil. That and the three foil/single main foil configuration is a major advance in foil and foiler design and direct evidence of "trickle down" from the first foiling Americas Cup. Damn cool stuff!

 

 

 

re·fine·ment noun \ri-ˈfīn-mənt\

: the act or process of removing unwanted substances from something : the act or process of making something pure

: the act or process of improving something

: an improved version of something

 



#85 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 29 April 2014 - 01:56 PM

Doug

 

I really don't see the GS32 and FP systems as a refinement of the TNZ system but more like the same thing at different ends of a spectrum. TNZ (and the other AC teams) could have gone for more V'ed foils and I am pretty sure that most of the final foils used were in fact more "open" (L like) than earlier iterations. They knew the trade off - more V and more heave control, less V and more need for manual intervention. However, for the AC teams, the most important thing was speed. As we saw, it was more important than heave stability (AC boats still had heave stability "moments"). With the GS32 and the FP, because they are one designs, they can afford to give up top end speed in exchange for near foolproof handling behavior. The second you are building to a development type rule, you start to push the other way because even small gains are worthwhile.

 

We also saw an understanding of this trade off with the C Class. When flying properly, Hydros was faster than Groupama, but Groupama got around the course faster. In thge A Class, the big question that is being considered is just how much heave stability you design into the foils and how much is achieved by the sailor, because based on current thinking, more inherent heave stability equals higher drag and lower speed.

 

Which shows that increased heave stability as per Groupama , GC32 and Flying Phantom is not necessarily slow. Groupama didn't win by just a little bit they dominated the whole regatta.



#86 macca

macca

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 721 posts

Posted 29 April 2014 - 08:05 PM

Doug
 
I really don't see the GS32 and FP systems as a refinement of the TNZ system but more like the same thing at different ends of a spectrum. TNZ (and the other AC teams) could have gone for more V'ed foils and I am pretty sure that most of the final foils used were in fact more "open" (L like) than earlier iterations. They knew the trade off - more V and more heave control, less V and more need for manual intervention. However, for the AC teams, the most important thing was speed. As we saw, it was more important than heave stability (AC boats still had heave stability "moments"). With the GS32 and the FP, because they are one designs, they can afford to give up top end speed in exchange for near foolproof handling behavior. The second you are building to a development type rule, you start to push the other way because even small gains are worthwhile.
 
We also saw an understanding of this trade off with the C Class. When flying properly, Hydros was faster than Groupama, but Groupama got around the course faster. In thge A Class, the big question that is being considered is just how much heave stability you design into the foils and how much is achieved by the sailor, because based on current thinking, more inherent heave stability equals higher drag and lower speed.


Perhaps there are some areas that have been developed with boats like the phantom and the GC to increase heave without the expense of speed, I mean, maybe kind of in some way it could be that this was achieved. But what do I know :)

#87 yhcranafvr

yhcranafvr

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 173 posts

Posted 29 April 2014 - 09:50 PM

I think you will find the up tip foil will suffer at higher speeds, in particular near the cavitation barrier.  When you get above 40 knots come back and tell us how its going.  I suspect you're going to hit a wall at around 35 knots...then again...what do I know...



#88 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 29 April 2014 - 10:50 PM

I think the AC 72's did close to 50 knots and Hydropter close to 60 knots and then there is Sail Rocket at 70 something. I seriously doubt that a production foiler needs to go anywhere near that fast for their market. The fact that almost anybody can sail a Flying Phantom or GC32 is spectacular accomplishment all by itself. And both these boats are already doing 30+... And they foil in around 6 knots of breeze-you just can't beat that.



#89 bgulari

bgulari

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,645 posts
  • Location:Detroit on the river

Posted 29 April 2014 - 11:16 PM

Maybe Doug you should go sail one

#90 bloodshot

bloodshot

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 688 posts
  • Location:United States
  • Interests:the pointy end of the boat

Posted 29 April 2014 - 11:19 PM

and its on like Donkey Kong....



#91 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 29 April 2014 - 11:20 PM

Maybe Doug you should go sail one

 

I imagine I will before long. Thanks for the suggestion.....



#92 bgulari

bgulari

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,645 posts
  • Location:Detroit on the river

Posted 30 April 2014 - 12:51 AM

The world is waiting

#93 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 30 April 2014 - 01:19 AM

The world is waiting

 

You're a funny guy-on an ac team yet?



#94 bgulari

bgulari

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,645 posts
  • Location:Detroit on the river

Posted 30 April 2014 - 01:28 AM

What's it to you Doug

Please show your firm grasp on all thing foiling by explaining the difference between heave and pitch stability

#95 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 30 April 2014 - 01:35 AM

What's it to you Doug

Please show your firm grasp on all thing foiling by explaining the difference between heave and pitch stability

 

You mean you're not on a team yet?! Thats too damn bad. Best of luck you'll probably need it....



#96 FishAintBiting

FishAintBiting

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 449 posts

Posted 30 April 2014 - 01:45 AM

What's it to you Doug

Please show your firm grasp on all thing foiling by explaining the difference between heave and pitch stability

 

You mean you're not on a team yet?! Thats too damn bad. Best of luck you'll probably need it....

 

Hey children, neither of you are helping this sport with this petty discussion.



#97 bgulari

bgulari

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,645 posts
  • Location:Detroit on the river

Posted 30 April 2014 - 01:54 AM

Waiting for your wisdom doug please do explain.

I just want Doug to go sailing once since his last attempt at foiling. I would also like him to explain in his own words what is the difference between heave and pitch stability. I.e. no cut and paste

#98 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,754 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 30 April 2014 - 02:00 AM

Waiting for your wisdom doug please do explain.

I just want Doug to go sailing once since his last attempt at foiling. I would also like him to explain in his own words what is the difference between heave and pitch stability. I.e. no cut and paste

.

......all I'm getting is a 'busy' signal  :mellow:



#99 Doug Lord

Doug Lord

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,145 posts
  • Location:Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Interests:Foiler design and development,.........sailing fast,
    movable ballast systems and..... justice.

Posted 30 April 2014 - 02:07 AM

Waiting for your wisdom doug please do explain.

I just want Doug to go sailing once since his last attempt at foiling. I would also like him to explain in his own words what is the difference between heave and pitch stability. I.e. no cut and paste

 

Geez, no wonder you're not on an AC team........ Why did you even start this crap?



#100 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,754 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 30 April 2014 - 02:17 AM

.

 

.................10............9...........






1 user(s) are reading this topic

1 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users