Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 9.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

shes legit ... foil arm looks to be in the front end of the box ... opposite of all other teams ... what are we going to read into that?

ETNZ are probably favorites .....but win or lose....Team New Zealand have firmly established themselves as the all time great AC nation in the modern era.   From the time they first emerged, they have

Slowly working through yesterday's lot

Posted Images

28 minutes ago, nav said:

 

A slightly different shot of the same, clearer, bigger, click through....

Ekevj5QUYAAbWeN?format=jpg&name=4096x409

 

Space for the batteries.
And create a plane for air cushion lift.
 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, nav said:

 

A slightly different shot of the same, clearer, bigger, click through....

Ekevj5QUYAAbWeN?format=jpg&name=4096x409

 

The ripples on the bottom of the keel are identical in those two pics, so unless those two pictures happen to have been taken at the exact same moment, then those ripples are indeed kinks in the surface.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, enigmatically2 said:

I think they are both the same photo, one is just the higher res version, no?

Different photos, same 'tin canning'.  They're obviously desperate to maximise the draft of the (last set of) chines and couldn't bring themselves to round that surface to avoid that issue.

Maybe they pull out when the boat's under load? Given the amount of time the boat will spend in the water I suspect they will have negligible detrimental effect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to guess they get stretched out once the load comes in the rigging. When the rig is tensioned, the mast compression will cause the hull to stretch. Assuming the keel is not required to carry any load, it's position outside of the hull will require that it stretches more than on a traditional hull. They have to build this compliance into the structure to prevent it deforming the structural elements in the hull.

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

Could it be to accommodate the internal hydraulic system?

Also, strikes me that it would be very easy to modify the ‘keel’ given it’s boxy shape. Could trim or extend it relatively easily I would’ve thought..

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

Also, strikes me that it would be very easy to modify the ‘keel’ given it’s boxy shape. Could trim or extend it relatively easily I would’ve thought..

Agreed, particularly noting its apparent light weight construction. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The bump is at the location of the arm and is probably a mix of making room for arm actuator and what worked best for low drag in CFD.  

I was shocked the first time I read about how low drag a box keel could be.  I think it was a rowboat, but they had test data to back up their claims.  I seem to remember the discussion including something like "at close to design speed it would require a much longer hull in a standard profile to get down to the drag that was measured, however at other speeds performance was not as good". 

For some pre-foiling speeds and conditions, it is likely that this thing could be a big improvement.  At the moment I am just not sure that those conditions will matter.  

I wonder most about how it will do when it comes to the drag of a splash (more than a kiss, less than a transition to sub foiling) coming out of a low wind turn.  CFD results should be pretty good for steady state, but a dynamic analysis gets to be a tad more involved.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I quite enjoyed the launching ceremony broadcast, some great info etc.

One thing I noticed, which maybe others did/didnt... Was it seemed that Simmer/Holroyd had some quite bad body language... I am absolutely  no expert and this might be me picking up on it from other comments I have seen where Simmer seems to wipe his hands of the hull lines... Interesting thought though.

Anyone else know what I mean?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Purple Headed Warrior said:

I quite enjoyed the launching ceremony broadcast, some great info etc.

One thing I noticed, which maybe others did/didnt... Was it seemed that Simmer/Holroyd had some quite bad body language... I am absolutely  no expert and this might be me picking up on it from other comments I have seen where Simmer seems to wipe his hands of the hull lines... Interesting thought though.

Anyone else know what I mean?

Yeah I know what you mean, and I worry that I am biased, but if you pick the right quotes then you can paint a picture of Holroyd being a bit hung out on this design. No one else is owning it at this time.

First you had Simmer's comment about how 'NH has signed off on the design'.

Then you had Ben say at launch “It looks like a rocket, let’s hope it sails like one too,”. Hope is a very loaded word when it comes to the AC's design process.

I wonder if NH is being held responsible for going down a dead-end with B1, and following that he has been told 'you got us into this, you better get us out' and so he's had to dramatically redesign something more than 1 generation beyond what they know - which is risky and uncomfortanle. The team probably had little choice and time to do anything but to proceed with this B2, and now people are saying 'well it better work'.

What is the saying about success having many fathers.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, rh3000 said:

Yeah I know what you mean, and I worry that I am biased, but if you pick the right quotes then you can paint a picture of Holroyd being a bit hung out on this design. No one else is owning it at this time.

First you had Simmer's comment about how 'NH has signed off on the design'.

Then you had Ben say at launch “It looks like a rocket, let’s hope it sails like one too,”. Hope is a very loaded word when it comes to the AC's design process.

I wonder if NH is being held responsible for going down a dead-end with B1, and following that he has been told 'you got us into this, you better get us out' and so he's had to dramatically redesign something more than 1 generation beyond what they know - which is risky and uncomfortanle. The team probably had little choice and time to do anything but to proceed with this B2, and now people are saying 'well it better work'.

What is the saying about success having many fathers.

But they say they have sailed B2 for more hours on the simulator than they will be sailing it on the water.  So, they have tested the shit out of the design.  They must believe in it, just depends on how accurate their simulator is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, rh3000 said:

Yeah I know what you mean, and I worry that I am biased, but if you pick the right quotes then you can paint a picture of Holroyd being a bit hung out on this design. No one else is owning it at this time.

First you had Simmer's comment about how 'NH has signed off on the design'.

Then you had Ben say at launch “It looks like a rocket, let’s hope it sails like one too,”. Hope is a very loaded word when it comes to the AC's design process.

I wonder if NH is being held responsible for going down a dead-end with B1, and following that he has been told 'you got us into this, you better get us out' and so he's had to dramatically redesign something more than 1 generation beyond what they know - which is risky and uncomfortanle. The team probably had little choice and time to do anything but to proceed with this B2, and now people are saying 'well it better work'.

What is the saying about success having many fathers.

I am pleased its not just me that thought this.

Clearly Holroyd did not dictate the design to the team and had to come up with a number of variants on the risk/reward scale... But I totally take your point that having chosen #1 and using that as a platform to develop, it does not leave them a huge amount to work with if it was considered a lemon.

I guess Holroyd is either right... or wrong... we shall see and maybe he will make Simmers Christmas card list again.

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

But they say they have sailed B2 for more hours on the simulator than they will be sailing it on the water.  So, they have tested the shit out of the design.  They must believe in it, just depends on how accurate their simulator is.

You have to assume the same is said for LR, ETNZ and AM..... They must all have done their homework

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Purple Headed Warrior said:

You have to assume the same is said for LR, ETNZ and AM..... They must all have done their homework

I guess my point is that if the sailors had a problem with the design they sure would have pointed it out.  So the sailors have bought into the design and Holroyd is not all alone to take all of the blame if it is a poor design.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The_Alchemist said:

I guess my point is that if the sailors had a problem with the design they sure would have pointed it out.  So the sailors have bought into the design and Holroyd is not all alone to take all of the blame if it is a poor design.

 "let’s hope it sails like one too" doesn't sound like much buy-in to me.

I'm not sure (m)any of the sailors would know where to begin designing an AC75 such is the level of sophistication of these vessels. They certainly won't be telling NH how to do his job.

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

Wth? What is the concensus?

 

959177f9-3726-4d73-839c-3f97bae3ed4d.png

Half of the designers liked AM's Y foils, and the other half liked NZ's T foils. So they compromised.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The more Y the better for high speed drag at the junction.  The kink lets you get a big angle for drag savings at the junction without having the tips going out of the box at the lower corners.

The price is probably some complexity on making a flap work across the kink. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, MaxHugen said:

I can't get my head around any of the hull below the waterline!

Yes - BR has a fascinating underside. The ‘ski keel’ is so Wazp like, but there’s also that other big shape starting farther aft, on each side? Love it. 

The ‘fit-on skeg’ on BR1 was very cool, they have taken that development path a big step forward. 
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, mikenz2 said:

A few team members are suited up, including helmets, so I'd expect to see some tow testing today (no mast).

They headed out but have gone up the harbour, under the harbour bridge, and outside my stalking range.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, P Flados said:

The more Y the better for high speed drag at the junction.  The kink lets you get a big angle for drag savings at the junction without having the tips going out of the box at the lower corners.

The price is probably some complexity on making a flap work across the kink. 

How does the Y reduce drag at the junction?

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

I can't get my head around any of the hull below the waterline!

There is no hull below the waterline when sailing.  

Who on the team has said that B1 was a lemon BTW?  I've not heard that anywhere execpt here, which hardly counts.

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

Wth? What is the concensus?

 

959177f9-3726-4d73-839c-3f97bae3ed4d.png

Are we seeing INEOS throwing the ball as far as they can and trying to catch it? Ignore the hull, they're all basically the same now (unless LR and NZ produce something completely different).

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, mogs said:

Waterline shape looks intended to satisfy 11.11 with minimum volume (which has instead been shifted to the keel):

image.png.7e0039ec8f88e244fe97c3469eaa4986.png

How is the MWP actually defined?  All I found was:

3.1 The Measurement Waterline Plane,MWP is defined as the horizontal reference plane of the yacht.

What defines where this plane is?

And what is "m4"... fourth power???

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

Are we seeing INEOS throwing the ball as far as they can and trying to catch it? Ignore the hull, they're all basically the same now (unless LR and NZ produce something completely different).

Yeah.  If you ignore the hull and the foils, those foil arms are exactly the same as the other teams.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, MaxHugen said:

How is the MWP actually defined?  All I found was:

3.1The Measurement Waterline Plane,MWPis defined as the horizontal reference plane of the yacht.

What defines where this plane is?

And what is "m4"... fourth power???

Math/Engineering thing. Thinking about it - it is a measure of the stability, so by saying 'at least 20' means that the boat needs to have at least a minimum righting moment.

MWP is the design waterline (in profile) at rest.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking forward to seeing what she looks like sailing and foiling at speed.? Also how quickly she gets up on her foils. Still haven't seen much of Patriot doing the same? Did see her get up but they were systems testing the boat for a while before that so can't gauge time to foil from word go so to speak.

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

MWP is the design waterline (in profile) at rest.

But in this case, almost the entire geometry of the boat is defined relative to this plane (and LCP + TRP), so it is critically important from a rules perspective.

image.png.9dff8efd1f9b3dbb756772ecef0447d2.png

Here is a post where I looked into the implications for this second moment of area with regards to ETNZ B1. It more or less describes the beam to length ratio of the waterline (i.e. the same area but wider has higher 2moa), presumably to ensure some minimum form stability at rest. Without it we'd be racing canoes.... !

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MaxHugen said:

How does the Y reduce drag at the junction?

You can think of the local velocities of the strut and the foil as adding together at the junction.  Picture the surfaces glowing and lighting up each other.  The more acute the angle between them, the more the mutual influence will be.  Opening up the junction will raise the speed for cavitation onset.  Higher velocities in the junction also make for more skin friction drag there.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, MaxHugen said:

And what is "m4"... fourth power???

So when calculating how good something is at resisting being tipped over (e.g. imagine a rectangular shaped barge), double the length will make it twice as stable (i.e. m1), but double the beam will make it 8 times as stable! (i.e. m^3), when multiplied together* this gives m4 .

*and by some constant specific to the shape (e.g. for a rectangle 1/12, and for an ellipse pi/4).

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, mogs said:

But in this case, almost the entire geometry of the boat is defined relative to this plane (and LCP + TRP), so it is critically important from a rules perspective.

image.png.9dff8efd1f9b3dbb756772ecef0447d2.png

Here is a post where I looked into the implications for this second moment of area with regards to ETNZ B1. It more or less describes the beam to length ratio of the waterline (i.e. the same area but wider has higher 2moa), presumably to ensure some minimum form stability at rest. Without it we'd be racing canoes.... !

Thank you!  And luminary. I was floundering trying to understand what this Rule actually meant, the maths etc is beyond me, but at least I can now understand it's about stability and righting moment! B)

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

So when calculating how good something is at resisting being tipped over (e.g. imagine a rectangular shaped barge), double the length will make it twice as stable (i.e. m1), but double the beam will make it 8 times as stable! (i.e. m^3), when multiplied together* this gives m4 .

*and by some constant specific to the shape (e.g. for a rectangle 1/12, and for an ellipse pi/4).

Great, now I can understand where the fourth power comes from! Always a good day when I learn something.

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

You can think of the local velocities of the strut and the foil as adding together at the junction.  Picture the surfaces glowing and lighting up each other.  The more acute the angle between them, the more the mutual influence will be.  Opening up the junction will raise the speed for cavitation onset.  Higher velocities in the junction also make for more skin friction drag there.

More, please

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Basiliscus said:

You can think of the local velocities of the strut and the foil as adding together at the junction.  Picture the surfaces glowing and lighting up each other.  The more acute the angle between them, the more the mutual influence will be.  Opening up the junction will raise the speed for cavitation onset.  Higher velocities in the junction also make for more skin friction drag there.

Have I got this right:  by having a larger angle between the strut and the top of the foil reduces the velocity, thereby increasing the speed for cavitation onset?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, rh3000 said:

 "let’s hope it sails like one too" doesn't sound like much buy-in to me.

I'm not sure (m)any of the sailors would know where to begin designing an AC75 such is the level of sophistication of these vessels. They certainly won't be telling NH how to do his job.

I never implied that the sailors would be designing the boat or doing NH's job.  I said that the sailors have sailed B2 In the simulator and you can be sure that if the design sucked, they would give that feedback.  As the pilot said in the interview, the interaction between the sailors and the designers has been substantial, a joint effort.  Therefore, the sailors have confidence in the design.  

I took the "let's hope..." as a sign of modesty and humor.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Basiliscus said:

Yes.

Cool, now I've learnt two things in one day.  I've been struggling to figure out why some teams were using a Y foil vs a T foil... even went down a rabbit hole doing vector force diagrams to determine vertical and horizontal lift between them - ignoring drag. (They were the same, based on my conditions.)

I liked the idea of the BFB (blended foil bulb) foil that NZ has been testing, presumably to reduce the bulb drag. Any thoughts on the benefits (or not) of this configuration?

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Sweya said:

Don’t think it’s a coincidence the keel and moth hull are alike.

Don’t think it’s a coincidence the keel and a child’s kayak are alike :rolleyes:

D1DF04C9-5674-4682-B35A-459C44BFE711.jpeg

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MaxHugen said:

Cool, now I've learnt two things in one day.  I've been struggling to figure out why some teams were using a Y foil vs a T foil... even went down a rabbit hole doing vector force diagrams to determine vertical and horizontal lift between them - ignoring drag. (They were the same, based on my conditions.)

I liked the idea of the BFB (blended foil bulb) foil that NZ has been testing, presumably to reduce the bulb drag. Any thoughts on the benefits (or not) of this configuration?

I haven't tried to analyze any of the configurations, so I don't have anything concrete to add to what's already been posted.  ETNZ adopted a similar kink to their AC50 foils, and OTUSA did, too, but with a more gentle curve.  P Flados already mentioned the kink complicates the flap design, which is probably why the other teams have gone with straight wings. 

The way the Design Rule is written, the two basic choices are to go with a T in order to put the weight as low down as possible, or to try to open up the junction by going to a Y foil and accept a high location for the bulb.  The kink allows them to open up the junction and push the bulb lower than for a pure Y foil.  They can either get more righting moment for the same weight, or they can meet the Rule requirement for arm c.g. with less weight and volume for lower drag.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Basiliscus said:

a T in order to put the weight as low down as possible,

A T foil would have more vertical resistance than a Y foil would it not? Thus giving more righting moment, and being able to apply more power?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ex-yachtie said:

Yeah.  If you ignore the hull and the foils, those foil arms are exactly the same as the other teams.

What's your point or are you just trying to be argumentative?

My point is that the hulls are quite similar now (despite the wanking going on in this forum), this AC will be decided by the foils and Rita II has the most extreme set seen so far. Just think of the flap arrangement for this; either it is full span and complicated, or it is partial span and a big risk that control will not be adequate (but reducing the flap size is a definite drag improvement). They've thrown the foil ball further than anyone so far.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ncik said:

What's your point or are you just trying to be argumentative?

My point is that the hulls are quite similar now (despite the wanking going on in this forum), this AC will be decided by the foils and Rita II has the most extreme set seen so far. Just think of the flap arrangement for this; either it is full span and complicated, or it is partial span and a big risk that control will not be adequate (but reducing the flap size is a definite drag improvement). They've thrown the foil ball further than anyone so far.

Hope they haven't thrown it out of the park into the thick thistle :P

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Ncik said:

What's your point or are you just trying to be argumentative?

My point is that the hulls are quite similar now (despite the wanking going on in this forum), this AC will be decided by the foils and Rita II has the most extreme set seen so far. Just think of the flap arrangement for this; either it is full span and complicated, or it is partial span and a big risk that control will not be adequate (but reducing the flap size is a definite drag improvement). They've thrown the foil ball further than anyone so far.

In your original post you said that if you “ignore the hull they’re all basically the same”.

You can’t have it both ways. 

If you ignore the hull there’s not much left!

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

I reckon this is the extent of their flaps. That's a big reduction in control surface area...assuming they were running full span flaps previously...

 

image.png.093b21c6358148fb2bccce270d2d1df6.png

Yellow line license revoked.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the rule prevent split flaps? The flap on the angled  section is visible but the high res pics from launch I wasn’t sure if you can have a flap on the flat section /if it has it in the flat section 

can someone clarify the rule? 

 

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

Ignore the hull, they're all basically the same now (unless LR and NZ produce something completely different).

is not the same as...

2 hours ago, Ex-yachtie said:

if you “ignore the hull they’re all basically the same”.

You're reading comprehension is terrible.

I am telling people to ignore the hull designs as they will now not determine who wins because they (the hulls) are all basically the same, unless LR or NZ come out with something completely left field or one of the designs likes getting stuck in irons pre-start. The hulls are also mostly out of the water, so primary consideration is aero and I can't see any major aero differences under the gunwales on the latest B2s, maybe length of the skeg, that's all. Rita IIs foil is by far the most different foil we've seen and it will either win or lose them the AC, not the hulls underwater characteristics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nick. 

A) I don't get how on earth you can think hill designs are the same. We have only seen 2 B2s and they are very different. Sure they both have a keel/skeg, cutaway stern and bow. But they are very different.

B) why on earth would they show off their race foils at the PR show. You can bet both will change. GBs aren't even the same on both sides

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Ncik said:

is not the same as...

You're reading comprehension is terrible.

I am telling people to ignore the hull designs as they will now not determine who wins because they (the hulls) are all basically the same, unless LR or NZ come out with something completely left field or one of the designs likes getting stuck in irons pre-start. The hulls are also mostly out of the water, so primary consideration is aero and I can't see any major aero differences under the gunwales on the latest B2s, maybe length of the skeg, that's all. Rita IIs foil is by far the most different foil we've seen and it will either win or lose them the AC, not the hulls underwater characteristics.

Got it.  We're all here talking about how different the hull is, and you're telling us they're basically the same and make no difference anyway.  I'll leave you to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Ex-yachtie said:

Got it.  We're all here talking about how different the hull is, and you're telling us they're basically the same and make no difference anyway.  I'll leave you to it.

In appearance they might be a little different, but in performance I don't think they'll have much affect.

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Ex-yachtie said:

Got it.  We're all here talking about how different the hull is, and you're telling us they're basically the same and make no difference anyway.  I'll leave you to it.

I think what he is simply saying is the hull itself won't decide who the winner is a the end of the day? That could be right or it could be wrong? Even if one boat is 3-5 seconds quicker onto the foils than another it won't matter if the slowest boat to foil is 1-2 knots faster around the course. It's fair to say though that Ineos and AM are quite different as hulls now so one hull could well be faster both in the water and out? All the designers have said hull design is crucial even though they are designed to fly because at 50 knots aero matters. Early days until we see NZ and LR..IMO

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Ex-yachtie said:

 

Are the guys sitting on top of the center divider? or are the cockpits just not that deep? Compared to ETNZ and  LR, and even AM now, the guys seem to be up quite high. surely they've done their homework in terms of windage.

Secondly, most other teams are up on foils airborne, even during tow testing. Britannia seems to be firmly glued to the water.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ex-yachtie said:

Ha ha ha. You make me smile sometimes. 
 

Did you see B1?!

Hahaha true. The sharp lines make her look impressive though!

Another thing, the foil arm pivots look to be set quite high, where their boat 1 arm pivots looked to be set quite low.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Forourselves said:

Are the guys sitting on top of the center divider? or are the cockpits just not that deep? Compared to ETNZ and  LR, and even AM now, the guys seem to be up quite high. surely they've done their homework in terms of windage.

Secondly, most other teams are up on foils airborne, even during tow testing. Britannia seems to be firmly glued to the water.

Look at the video further up the page they are very high and out of the water. Any higher they might take off. The 2nd video was shot after they came back down. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, terrafirma said:

Look at the video further up the page they are very high and out of the water. Any higher they might take off. The 2nd video was shot after they came back down. 

Blah,

Edited by Sailbydate
Cock up. Sorry Terra.
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Forourselves said:

econdly, most other teams are up on foils airborne, even during tow testing. Britannia seems to be firmly glued to the water.

Mode. Arms are down. Check out post, #2966 above.

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

Don’t think it’s a coincidence the keel and moth hull are alike.

Now compare that shape to the one 2019 World Champion Tom Slingsby was sailing in:

image.png.7877f04534bc7e2f1d78cd3a659a2590.png

Not exactly a shoe box, is it?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, mikenz2 said:

They headed out but have gone up the harbour, under the harbour bridge, and outside my stalking range.

According to Forum Rules, that's illegal! :lol:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, MaxHugen said:

I can't get my head around any of the hull below the waterline!

Reflections? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Forourselves said:

Hahaha true. The sharp lines make her look impressive though!

Another thing, the foil arm pivots look to be set quite high, where their boat 1 arm pivots looked to be set quite low.

The foil arm pivot point is defined in the rules. See mogs' post above (#2947) for diagram from the Rules.

Link to post
Share on other sites