Steve and Dave Clarks Unidentified Foiling Object
- Thread starter Doug Lord
- Start date
Lost in Translation
Super Anarchist
Very innovative approach. I had been thinking about some of the pieces of the UFO concept, but Steve took it much farther and made it a reality. Can't wait to see it Newport.
Steve, from what you are seeing, do you think the concept has potential for many catamarans?
Steve, from what you are seeing, do you think the concept has potential for many catamarans?
sail(plane)
Anarchist
- 691
- 108
Is nobody going to compare it to the S9?? To me they are pointing to the same target
Bill5
Right now
I'll have a go. The S9 appears much more technical and complicated than the UFO. The rig is more sophisticated, and with a trapeze it would likely be more difficult to sail. It really looks more like a training boat for A-Class cats. Also, at $18,000 (in Europe) the price point is more than double the UFO.
JimC
Not actually an anarchist.
S9 versus UFO - I think you could say that in concept Steve and David's boat is more like an extreme tunnel hulled scow than a catamaran, so really utterly different craft..
The extraordinarily long gestation of foil boats (the idea dates back to the 50s, it was reasonably often attempted in the 60s) is probably as much as anything down to carbon fibre being a required material, but I think for a long time configurations were wrong.
Initial foilers were all 3 point craft with bruce foils, like power hydrofoils. This was quite wrong, because it was surface piercing and required brute power. Next the experimentalists were seduced by the trimaran sit in the middle concept, and in particular by the possibilities of holding down the windward hull with the foil. The T foil was in the event a critical development, but this configuration was a blind alley - eg Hobie Trifoiler.
Moth experiments started with 3 point concepts, but never really worked well enough, but the big jump was when the Moth class banned the 3 point boats (well, confirmed that really the rules already banned them) and it turned out the two T foils on the centreline is, thus far at least, the right configuration for a monohull.
T foils were tried on cats, but didn't seem to be that great. What seems to be working for multihulls is the heavily curved and shaped highly asymettric foil, and sailing the boat like a proper multihull - ie windward hull and foils clear of the water. So there, so far, we have what seems to be the right configuration for a catamaran foiler, and its utterly different from the monohull. I suspect there may be a way to go there though.
Now the other thing we can see is that all the hopeful wider market monohull foilers so far have stumbled, and I think the reason has been that they were ether half ass conversions, or else just second rate Moths, and if you're going to have a second rate Moth then a secondhand real Moth is better. So maybe no-one has yet come up with the right configuration for a wider market monohull foiler. This seems to me the first considered attempt at something that is neither a half ass conversion nor a second rate Moth, but a fresh look at the problem saying, "right, what is the correct configuration to put above centre line T foils". Is it right? Time will tell, but there's clearly a lot of smart thinking gone on.
The extraordinarily long gestation of foil boats (the idea dates back to the 50s, it was reasonably often attempted in the 60s) is probably as much as anything down to carbon fibre being a required material, but I think for a long time configurations were wrong.
Initial foilers were all 3 point craft with bruce foils, like power hydrofoils. This was quite wrong, because it was surface piercing and required brute power. Next the experimentalists were seduced by the trimaran sit in the middle concept, and in particular by the possibilities of holding down the windward hull with the foil. The T foil was in the event a critical development, but this configuration was a blind alley - eg Hobie Trifoiler.
Moth experiments started with 3 point concepts, but never really worked well enough, but the big jump was when the Moth class banned the 3 point boats (well, confirmed that really the rules already banned them) and it turned out the two T foils on the centreline is, thus far at least, the right configuration for a monohull.
T foils were tried on cats, but didn't seem to be that great. What seems to be working for multihulls is the heavily curved and shaped highly asymettric foil, and sailing the boat like a proper multihull - ie windward hull and foils clear of the water. So there, so far, we have what seems to be the right configuration for a catamaran foiler, and its utterly different from the monohull. I suspect there may be a way to go there though.
Now the other thing we can see is that all the hopeful wider market monohull foilers so far have stumbled, and I think the reason has been that they were ether half ass conversions, or else just second rate Moths, and if you're going to have a second rate Moth then a secondhand real Moth is better. So maybe no-one has yet come up with the right configuration for a wider market monohull foiler. This seems to me the first considered attempt at something that is neither a half ass conversion nor a second rate Moth, but a fresh look at the problem saying, "right, what is the correct configuration to put above centre line T foils". Is it right? Time will tell, but there's clearly a lot of smart thinking gone on.
Doug Lord
Super Anarchist
- Thread starter
- #66
I think Steve and Daves boat is outstanding but it isn't the only new monohull foiler. The Quant 23 is the first foiling keelboat in the history of the world and it uses foils that are entirely different from anything else on the market. They develop righting moment as well as lift. What they don't do is generate lateral resistance so they can be 100% retracted in very light air(or any other time you don't want to foil). It has to be very light air because this monohull keelboat will foil in 5 knots of wind on flat water.
There is another new boat- the Flo 1 by aeronamics- that is using the same type of foil as the Quant with the same aim to fly in light air.
These two boats and some others are trashing the old concepts about foiling in terms of making the whole wind range available to their customers contrary to the first production foilers that needed over 10 knots to foil.
You're 100% right-there is a lot of smart thinking going on.
Last edited by a moderator:
Doug Halsey
Member
- 352
- 107
Jim : I think your history needs a little revising.
Ironically enough, the first sailing hydrofoil (at least that I'm aware of) was probably more like the UFO than anything else. Designed by Robert Gilruth & Bill Carl, and sailed in 1938, it was a small catamaran with a horizontal main foil spanning the entire distance between the hulls. I'm not sure what sort of aft-foil, or foils it had for pitch control.
After that, there have been all sorts of different configurations, including many 4-point catamarans - not just 3-point configurations.
To say that "the configurations were wrong" ignores the fact that several of these configurations set World Speed Records, either outright (l'Hydroptere), or in their sail-area categories (Icarus, Longshot, at least one of Sam Bradfield's boats, etc.) And their sail areas were not particularly large; no need for any "brute force".
What is different these days is that foilers are being designed to perform well around a racecourse, not just in speed trials. A Moth is very fast in that regard, but its top speeds would be no match to some of the earlier boats with their wrong configurations.
Finally, the use of carbon fiber is not necessarily required in order to develop a successful foiler - witness the Waspz, the Quant-23, & other recent designs.
Doug Lord
Super Anarchist
- Thread starter
- #68
About the Catafoil-1938-thanks for reminding me, Doug:
R. Gilruth and Bill Cart, also of the US and of the NACA started experimenting
with foils in 1938. They successfully flew a catamaran hydrofoil
sailing craft which took off at 5 knots and cruised at 12 knots. The main
foil had an aspect ratio of 11 : I, a 12 ft span, a I ft chord and the remarkable
L/D ratio of 25 : I. The foil section was one of big camber for high lift at low speed, like NACA 65-506. (Bold by DL)
http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=171516
http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/multihulls/robert-gilruth-first-foiling-catamaran-1938-a-54980.html
R. Gilruth and Bill Cart, also of the US and of the NACA started experimenting
with foils in 1938. They successfully flew a catamaran hydrofoil
sailing craft which took off at 5 knots and cruised at 12 knots. The main
foil had an aspect ratio of 11 : I, a 12 ft span, a I ft chord and the remarkable
L/D ratio of 25 : I. The foil section was one of big camber for high lift at low speed, like NACA 65-506. (Bold by DL)
http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=171516
http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/multihulls/robert-gilruth-first-foiling-catamaran-1938-a-54980.html
Last edited by a moderator:
HomoSapien
New member
- 10
- 0
Last edited by a moderator:
JimC
Not actually an anarchist.
Rohanoz
Super Anarchist
SHC - while I appreciate the ingenuity of the rig, can you give a little insight into why the extra windage and complication of the setup is justified on a boat that is otherwise designed to be so easily accessible and simple?
Dave Clark
Anarchist
I can field this one. Had a hand in the rig development. Wishbones are safer and allow endplating to the deck which has some nice effects. I'm pretty psyched about our aero package. Plus powerful vangs, and booms that can really vang up a roughly 8 square meter rig are neither simple nor cheap. We explored a bunch of other stuff. We chose this package.
Btw, I've got to personally thank you and Amac for at least a part of this boat's existance. The first boat I foiled was your bladerider in Newport way back in 07 during,the bladerider world tour. Love at first flight. It was only a matter of time.
DRC
Rohanoz
Super Anarchist
Sorry Dave - not that Rohan! But he used to post here a bit, so may pass by and catch your nice words!!!
Thanks for the info on your thinking for rig layout choice. While I'm personally not convinced, beyond the end-plating, I'll be very keen to see how it fairs in the end users hands.
Hobie Bravo?
[if anyone is wondering, I am taking it upon myself to officially declare this post as a joke]
Last edited by a moderator:
Doug Lord
Super Anarchist
- Thread starter
- #76
One of the reasons I was so surprised seeing the UFO is that I've been working on a model design that is a sort of modern version of Dominion-the first tunnel hulled scow mentioned earlier in this thread. Scaled up the model would work well at 16' as a singlehander. The biggest difference is that the Dominion 2-HW uses foils similar to and inspired by Hugh Welbourns Quant 23.
Amazing coincidence in somewhat similar hull shape!
D2-100% self-righting RC foiler:
20 year old "B" test rig-"A" rig is much bigger and designed to work with a Trapeze Power Ballast System. Good chance it will foil with the "B" rig and no movable ballast:
Amazing coincidence in somewhat similar hull shape!
D2-100% self-righting RC foiler:
20 year old "B" test rig-"A" rig is much bigger and designed to work with a Trapeze Power Ballast System. Good chance it will foil with the "B" rig and no movable ballast:
Last edited by a moderator:
Steve Clark
Super Anarchist
Kind of like Kon Tiki, Spaceship One, the Brooklyn Dodgers and an apple.
SHC
SHC
