Recon diary

Stingray~

Super Anarchist
13,158
3,639
PNW
They made the 72 foil in the face of a lot of rules making it impossible?
Very difficult, yes. The intent of the AC72 Rule was to disallow foiling but with the help of M&M, who were in large part in control of the writing of that Rule, ETNZ found a language loophole big enough to run with.
 

Kiwing

Super Anarchist
3,732
678
Bay of Islands
Someone could make some morphing foils within these rules as well.

Lets have fun speculating. None of us speculated that the jib sheeting would be where it is and yet we have not come up with the next development there either.
Come on let's have more fun.
 

The_Alchemist

Super Anarchist
3,073
1,682
USA
This rotation rule relates to the foil arm only and so it's at least conceivable that the foil could pivot off the end of the arm.

So, the pivot might be legal below the connection.

Some amount of pivot would allow you to for example keep the foil horizontal no matter the arm's rotation - if you wanted that flexibility.
Or tilt it do get more side force and less lift without moving the arm.
 
Last edited:

The_Alchemist

Super Anarchist
3,073
1,682
USA
The foil wing has to be connected to the arm as per the arm spec. We haven't seen that as yet, but all the evidence suggests it requires it to be fixed.

Foil wings and foil flap segments are components segments. So they cannot morph. And as there is only one wing that cannot pivot in the middle or anything. Flap segments can only rotate around one axis There is allowed to be a flexure area across them but there are limits on that too
And it there a rule that the foils have to be symmetrical from the center of the foil arm?

Just having some fun trying to think outside of the box.
 

Stingray~

Super Anarchist
13,158
3,639
PNW
And it there a rule that the foils have to be symmetrical from the center of the foil arm?

Just having some fun trying to think outside of the box.
There is a ‘box’ of dimensions the foil wings need to fit inside of but it obviously doesn’t need to be perpendicular in space; maybe it does need to be so wrt to the arm.
 

enigmatically2

Super Anarchist
4,278
2,246
Earth
Some interesting quotes from here

1) LR:
"As forecasted, the pressure in the gulf decreased to below 10kn around 11:30 and the team hoisted J1. After several tryouts taking off, the LEQ12 was towed up by RIB twice and after trying some maneuvers the team called it a day"
They had the J2 up earlier so I assume it was that. In which they are struggling to take off in more breeze (at least 9 kts) than Ineos managed with the J3 the other day

2) Ineos
"In terms of manoeuvres, other than a couple of displacement tacks in between runs, all the other tacks and gybes were slick fully foiling turns"

3) NZ
"Quite often the AC40 looked faster but I did see the LEQ12 trying some extreme pitch (bow down) and heel to leeward angles."

So much for the perceived wisdom on here re all 3 of those points. Almost as if it depends on what the boats are testing and we shouldn't read too much into individual videos or speeds because all boats are slick at some point and less so at others

More interesting
"The Head of the [NZ] LEQ12 main looks flatter than the AC40 and sometimes up range looks to be mildly inverted in the top 1/4 on the leeward side"
With no top main section, I wonder how they are doing that
 

JALhazmat

Super Anarchist
4,599
1,758
Southampton
Inverted head on the sail has been the norm for windsurfing sails for donkeys years

sufficient down haul ( Cunningham) and hey presto your leech tension bleeds away from the top gradually down the leech
 

enigmatically2

Super Anarchist
4,278
2,246
Earth
Inverted head on the sail has been the norm for windsurfing sails for donkeys years

sufficient down haul ( Cunningham) and hey presto your leech tension bleeds away from the top gradually down the leech
Perhaps its terminology, I would regard the head as feathered not inverted in that case
 

JALhazmat

Super Anarchist
4,599
1,758
Southampton
Yeah at some point the inverted head thing appeared here and stuck I think the invert the head fit additional righting moment thing on the wings, it’s just twist realistically
 

Stingray~

Super Anarchist
13,158
3,639
PNW
Yeah at some point the inverted head thing appeared here and stuck I think the invert the head fit additional righting moment thing on the wings, it’s just twist realistically
Yes, we saw the invert/twist used even by the BOR90 with their truly-gigantic wing to good effect at times. It was touted as being one of the benefits of wings.
 

enigmatically2

Super Anarchist
4,278
2,246
Earth
Yes, we saw the invert/twist used even by the BOR90 with their truly-gigantic wing to good effect at times. It was touted as being one of the benefits of wings.
Any rig can twist, the assertion was that the top section can be inverted on a solid wing to provide significant righting moment (rather than just reducing heeling moment)
But in this case they may just mean twisted off until feathering/backing and its just terminology
(and yes I know that when a soft sail backs/feathers it can produce some righting moment, but not the significant amount of a solid rig - that I have seen)
 

JALhazmat

Super Anarchist
4,599
1,758
Southampton
No righting moment was harmed in the making of this picture

320050E1-6AE4-4863-898B-57881219FC8E.jpeg
 

Dogfish

Member
255
163
I think the term is "gust response" the leech twists open automatically without the need for trimming the sheet or the traveller. If you have it matched to maxium righting moment then the leech just opens when that point is reached. Probably windsurfers are the only working example of this in practice as the above photo shows.
 

The_Alchemist

Super Anarchist
3,073
1,682
USA
Some interesting quotes from here

1) LR:
"As forecasted, the pressure in the gulf decreased to below 10kn around 11:30 and the team hoisted J1. After several tryouts taking off, the LEQ12 was towed up by RIB twice and after trying some maneuvers the team called it a day"
They had the J2 up earlier so I assume it was that. In which they are struggling to take off in more breeze (at least 9 kts) than Ineos managed with the J3 the other day

2) Ineos
"In terms of manoeuvres, other than a couple of displacement tacks in between runs, all the other tacks and gybes were slick fully foiling turns"

3) NZ
"Quite often the AC40 looked faster but I did see the LEQ12 trying some extreme pitch (bow down) and heel to leeward angles."

So much for the perceived wisdom on here re all 3 of those points. Almost as if it depends on what the boats are testing and we shouldn't read too much into individual videos or speeds because all boats are slick at some point and less so at others

More interesting
"The Head of the [NZ] LEQ12 main looks flatter than the AC40 and sometimes up range looks to be mildly inverted in the top 1/4 on the leeward side"
With no top main section, I wonder how they are doing that
INEOS looked much better and actually very good in that video. Looks like they have gotten the LEQ12 figured out and it will be good for 2 boat against their AC40.

My earlier comments were based upon what we were seeing, this changes those observations.
 

enigmatically2

Super Anarchist
4,278
2,246
Earth
INEOS looked much better and actually very good in that video. Looks like they have gotten the LEQ12 figured out and it will be good for 2 boat against their AC40.

My earlier comments were based upon what we were seeing, this changes those observations.
There have been other videos that they have been stable, but it is in any case irrelevant. It was legit to question that last time round, but the exam question has changed.
We know that they can fly stabily, they did that already. They can do it but obviously won't be enough.
So they will have to push the limits, and that is likely to make them less stable while they test new things.
So stability is irrelevant unless we know what they are testing, whether they are using AP etc
 
Top