New Swiss Foiling Machine

[Chris Ostlind]

OK, I swifted the thread on the Swiss Foiler over here to keep it clear of the other stuff going on with the development (or not) of the trad 18 that has foils.

Clearly, this is a completely new "boat". Actually, it's more like a sorta floaty space frame with a modernist style of rig based on the 18. There has been a lot of talk about taking the Moth to this sort of, space frame, platform over on Sailing Anarchy amid the discussion on What's Next.

Please guys, have at it with your comments both for and against this new development. As I said in the post this morning on the Foiling 18 thread… this is more an incremental development from the trad hulled Aussie18 skiff, than it is a revolutionary design departure. This is especially true when one considers that this idea has been discussed already with regards to the Moth and any future development with that design.

Also, keep in mind that this is the first prototype of the boat as shown and naturally, it will have many cobby features that need to be sorted before a final design idiom has been reached.

I wish the guys a large portion of good will as they continue to examine the potential here. (and I'd still like to see the whole space frame done in ISO-Truss components for strength and aero benefits)

More info can be read here: http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=71717

My disclaimer: I do not have a stake in these boats, as I do not design craft in this medium. I am interested in the type as they represent a unique development in the sailing world for all sailors to comprehend. My positions on foiling boats, in general, are well documented here for anyone who does a search along those lines and is willing to read the info.

I'm not against new technology, but I caution anyone who believes that new technology, alone, can be the sole answer for what ails the commercial success of the sailing world, which is currently caught in a deep and ugly spiral into non-issue status worldwide.

[Gary Baigent]

It is the logical way to go - I mean the Bladerunner looks minimalist but this is going even further and they have already succeeded brilliantly, and, ehh, well ......... good on yer Chris mate for having a balanced viewpoint and not going the dog with rabies way.

[Chris Ostlind]

In fact, this 18 is the most advanced monofoiler ever to touch water and its relationship to the 18 class is irrelevant.

So, Doug, what makes this boat so advanced compared to those that came before it?

I will agree that it is a different approach and that the guys have shown some very clever solutions.

The boat has barely touched the water at this point and it could very well turn out to be a design study dead-end for various reasons. Would that then qualify the prototype as "advanced"? Or would it, in fact, mean that it's time to go back to the drawing board for a rethink?

Just remember.... Ford Motor Company said the same thing about the Edsel when it was first introduced to the public. Similarly, the Corvair.

Let's give the boys some time to sort through the issues before we start to drape them in the purple robes of royalty, shall we?

[Meanz Beanz]

WOW a class that has developed right out of class, that's, well that's....

OK, just a couple of dumb bum ape questions.

1. Why bother with the pretence of a boat shape? Why not just go for the most efficient engineering solution? Surely there is excess weight in that shape? (this is where the intellectual elite can giggle at the ape)

2. What of light air performance, couldn't this thing use a hull of some sort (not the pipes? surely not the pipes?) for non foiling conditions, or are we all foils all the time now?

Looks interesting... I wonder where it will end up?

Fails one old test, to be sweet shes got to look sweet... but heck that's hardly scientific. For me boats are part love and I can love all sorts but that just doesn't look classic, hot, racy... anything that I could get passionate about no matter how fast it is. BTW its not the foils, I like the Moths, foiler 18 etc its that exposed carbon rib cage ... JM Apes O.

[wind_apparent]

2. What of light air performance, couldn't this thing use a hull of some sort (not the pipes? surely not the pipes?) for non foiling conditions, or are we all foils all the time now?

.

I think its just a proto, I've seen the 3d designs, eventually after they get the rig and spaceframe worked out they are going to mount a micro draft hull/shell (almost looks like a crazy surfboard) to the bottom, cool cool cool idea, so it will have a hull, but barely.

[Meanz Beanz]

I have seen a Moth that is a little similar to that concept, not a space frame just continuous wings on pillars.

[wind_apparent]

I have seen a Moth that is a little similar to that concept, not a space frame just continuous wings on pillars.

I've seen pictures of the boat your talking about on the moth forums (red and looks like one single hobiecat hull) , like that but even more minimal. there are pictures on the other 18' foil skiff thread, last page before it got moved here.

[bistros]

According to Thomas the boat is 30m LOA-but the fact is that whatever you call it its whole development has been traced in this thread. It would be a damn shame to change that now.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article in the Daily Sail:
http://www.thedailysail.com/ISM/articles.nsf/Features/BFB0B79A5C699B598025743B00320B9E?OpenDocument&Login

30M = over 100 feet!

There has been little substantive discussion of the development in the previous thread. Lots of guess work and assumptions though.

I would imagine that language is somewhat of a barrier. By American standards I'm bilingual, but I will admit freely that my language skills are far better in English - especially on detailed technical topics. I'd be willing to bet if we were a German forum the quality from Jundt et al would be more substantive.

Key points that beg more enlightenment:

1) Why the forward main foil placement? Every design issue is a compromise, and a discussion of the issues and the trade offs would be enlightening. I would imagine the maneuverability would be reduced as the distance between the foils increased.

2) The space frame does provide a very strong structure for foiling, but it did remove the design from being a sailboat and into something else. Even with a minimal hull/skin grafted on at a later date, we are no longer in Kansas, Dorothy.

3) Is this an attempt to raise the foiling bar beyond what has happened in the Moth? If so, I don't see the potential to better the Moth's time around a race course. Hydroptere need not worry about this one, so all out speed isn't the target. What IS the target? What are they trying to prove? Is the target lifting 200+ kilos all up weight out of the water and getting it above 20 knots?

4) Is there an intent for the Space Frame Foiler to compete with 18 foot skiffs? Has this been designed to be debatably close to the European 18' skiff class rules?

5) What future do they see in this design? Is there an intent to create a development class for racing? Do they have a public design brief?

6) The development has been sponsored by a private bank. Congrats to the team for getting sponsorship. What are the sponsor's expecting in return? This question is more for others seeking similar sponsorship for their own projects. I don't think the sponsor's target customers are obsessed keyboard cowboys sitting on the Florida coast.

I applaud the experimental development effort being done for no reason other than because the challenge is there.

Cheers

[Meanz Beanz]

I applaud the experimental development effort being done for no reason other than because the challenge is there.

Yes.

Its going to be fascinating to watch this one.

30ft LOA?

[Chris Ostlind]

30M = over 100 feet!

Yes, Clearly someone got more than a little carried away with their post and transposed a figure of feet for the accurate listing in meters. It should have been 10M.



Key points that beg more enlightenment:

1) Why the forward main foil placement? Every design issue is a compromise, and a discussion of the issues and the trade offs would be enlightening. I would imagine the maneuverability would be reduced as the distance between the foils increased.

I would guess that it has to do with the amount and presence of the headsail in the formula and the need for overall boat balance. You don't see this foil placement on the Moth setup where they do not run a jib. In fact, the forward placement has been tried on the Moth and it flunked when compared to the current location.



2) The space frame does provide a very strong structure for foiling, but it did remove the design from being a sailboat and into something else. Even with a minimal hull/skin grafted on at a later date, we are no longer in Kansas, Dorothy.

Yeah, pretty much that is how I feel, B-Man. I think the space frame allows some very open design architecture. This, in turn, gives the designer a lot of latitude for moving things about, re-fixturing and running another test. It's a lot more flexible than a fixed, hard shell hull in that way.

I do not see this as a trend for boats in the future unless they, too, are involved in an extensive sorting-out procedure.



3) Is this an attempt to raise the foiling bar beyond what has happened in the Moth? If so, I don't see the potential to better the Moth's time around a race course. Hydroptere need not worry about this one, so all out speed isn't the target. What IS the target? What are they trying to prove? Is the target lifting 200+ kilos all up weight out of the water and getting it above 20 knots?

I saw a quote from Jundt where he stated,
"The aim for the new boat, in performance terms, is to be as quick as possible in light wind"
"we are not aiming for a high top speed, we are aiming for a high average speed around a course..."

This quote originates at The Daily Sail online and was posted today at SA by a member there named, Patio.

I'm guessing he feels that a totally different design would be about going really fast and that, all by itself, would be a limiting factor for a course where the boat needs to be able to get back up and flying quickly after rounding a mark.



4) Is there an intent for the Space Frame Foiler to compete with 18 foot skiffs? Has this been designed to be debatably close to the European 18' skiff class rules?


I have no idea about that. It would seem that the boat would quickly be legislated into its own niche if the 18's wanted to protect what they have at present. The final boat would likely be extremely spendy to produce and purchase, so it really ups the money game and limits the field immediately.



5) What future do they see in this design? Is there an intent to create a development class for racing? Do they have a public design brief?

No idea and apparently no mention of this position in any published material that I know of. Then again, I do not spend all day on the Web, scouring the crannies for the latest stuff, so something could be out there.



6) The development has been sponsored by a private bank. Congrats to the team for getting sponsorship. What are the sponsor's expecting in return? This question is more for others seeking similar sponsorship for their own projects. I don't think the sponsor's target customers are obsessed keyboard cowboys sitting on the Florida coast.


The sponsors, Mirabaud & Cie in Switzerland have a website here: http://www.mirabaud.com/main.cfm?idpage=7 There's plenty to read there, though its written in the typical banking firm style. The really neat thing is that the new boat sponsorship is displayed, prominently on their front page with a quick link to the written release describing the boat the program of sponsorship, though not the details, and is a terrific indication of the way that Euro companies get involved with development programs like this one.

That page is here: http://www.mirabaud.com/jset/mirabaud/wwwmirabaudcom/data/communication/communiques_de_presse/2008/mirabaud_lx/copresse_en.pdf

Whatever one thinks of the boat, its style to this point, or the focus of the development program, it is an interesting process that will be, hopefully, shared publicly with the boating world.

[Meanz Beanz]

All that said what once was the outrageous expense that Channel 7 went to in building the highly successful "Colour 7" (Nomex, Carbon and Epoxy in 77) in then what was a truly unlimited 18' Skiff Class is now more in line with common place technology in the class. Does the future hold Carbon tubes? Colour 7 was a little derided for the use of "unattainable technology", it actually lead to the class being restricted from memory...

A pic of an early 18' foiler... just for fun.

[wind_apparent]

A pic of an early 18' foiler... just for fun.


I want to get a ride on that Warlock, wingfoils look fun.....but way to stable:D
if you don't get put in the drink every once in a while (alot) your not doing it right.;)

[Meanz Beanz]

Yeah being a dumb ape I need some one to explain why monofoils are actually better than a more stable arrangement. I can see that there could be a speed advantage but I would have thought it slight and that the stability would have compensated for it. After all the fastest around the course is he who makes the least mistakes, Rohan Veal talks in terms of slowing down to survive downwind in a blow ultimately being the quickest way around the course.

Looking around you'd have to think monofoils are the way to go but has it been well tested ? You would assume so... or is it a craze LOL.

Would a guru please explain to the ape?

[wind_apparent]

Yeah being a dumb ape I need some one to explain why monofoils are actually better than a more stable arrangement. I can see that there could be a speed advantage but I would have thought it slight and that the stability would have compensated for it. After all the fastest around the course is he who makes the least mistakes, Rohan Veal talks in terms of slowing down to survive downwind in a blow ultimately being the quickest way around the course.

Looking around you'd have to think monofoils are the way to go but has it been well tested ? You would assume so... or is it a craze LOL.

Would a guru please explain to the ape?

it's a craze, monofoils are crazy though, so therefore good......:D as far as I know, the first Moth foilers had wingmounted foils, they were more stable, but were also made illegal......so they figured out a way to make the T-foil, to get arount the rule.........:idea: :idea: :idea: :idea: :idea: :D

[Meanz Beanz]

Ahhh the rules... memories of distorted IOR machines. http://foolstown.com/sm/umn.gif

[Jundt]

30M = over 100 feet!

There has been little substantive discussion of the development in the previous thread. Lots of guess work and assumptions though.

I would imagine that language is somewhat of a barrier. By American standards I'm bilingual, but I will admit freely that my language skills are far better in English - especially on detailed technical topics. I'd be willing to bet if we were a German forum the quality from Jundt et al would be more substantive.



YES OF COURSE WE DO NOT WANT TO "GAIN" WEIGHT BUT RATHER *REDUCE" IT


Key points that beg more enlightenment:

1) Why the forward main foil placement? Every design issue is a compromise, and a discussion of the issues and the trade offs would be enlightening. I would imagine the maneuverability would be reduced as the distance between the foils increased.


WE HOPE FOR BETTER PITCH STABILITY IN FLYING MODE
OUR MACHINE IS NOT A MOTH, THINGS ARE'T AS EASYLY EXTRAPOLATED...(4 TIMES THE WEIGHT !)
LAKE HUGGING IT WILL BE DIFFICULT TO TACK BUT MAYBE ALSO HAVE BETTER BALANCE WITH THE BIG GENOIS UP

IF NO GOOD WE CUT A TUBE AWAY AND PUT IT BACK WHERE IT WAS


2) The space frame does provide a very strong structure for foiling, but it did remove the design from being a sailboat and into something else. Even with a minimal hull/skin grafted on at a later date, we are no longer in Kansas, Dorothy.


I CALL IT A PLATEFORM FOR EXPERIMENTATION (AND IT IS PROPERLY ENGINEERED AND STRONG .: I HAVE A STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING COMPANY IT HAD TO LOOK LIKE A CRANE...)


3) Is this an attempt to raise the foiling bar beyond what has happened in the Moth? If so, I don't see the potential to better the Moth's time around a race course. Hydroptere need not worry about this one, so all out speed isn't the target. What IS the target? What are they trying to prove? Is the target lifting 200+ kilos all up weight out of the water and getting it above 20 knots?


WE RACE DAY RACES ON THE LAKE AND GO FOR THE OVERALL MONOHULL (SIC!) WIN

AND OVERALL PERSONAL FUN DURING THE FEW OURS WE CAN GET AWAY FROM THE ROUTINE DAYS


4) Is there an intent for the Space Frame Foiler to compete with 18 foot skiffs? Has this been designed to be debatably close to the European 18' skiff class rules?


NO


5) What future do they see in this design? Is there an intent to create a development class for racing? Do they have a public design brief?


NO


6) The development has been sponsored by a private bank. Congrats to the team for getting sponsorship. What are the sponsor's expecting in return? This question is more for others seeking similar sponsorship for their own projects. I don't think the sponsor's target customers are obsessed keyboard cowboys sitting on the Florida coast.


THEY LIKE CRAZY PEOPLE


I applaud the experimental development effort being done for no reason other than because the challenge is there.


Cheers

THANK YOU VERY MUCH
THOMAS

[antoineb]

Thomas (the engineer behind the project, who just posted answers to various questions) is probably too modest to say it, so I will: in its first race on a lake, namely the Bol d'Or du Lac de Neuchatel, in Switzerland, organised by the Cercle de la Voile de Grandson, the prototype foiler "Mirabaud LX" took 1st place in "monohulls", 17 minutes ahead of a (modified) 18-footer on a course lasting about 5 hours. The first "normal" monohull was a 42'' racer another 20mins behind.

Mirabaud LX was also only about 20mins behind the last multihull of the 32'' class Ventilo 32 (there's a very active and competitive fleet of these boats in French-speaking Swizerland).

This was in spite of very light airs which for the most part (1) prevented the "LX" from flying, and (2) made it a very tiring work for the crew to keep the boat on it's mini "hull".

So all in all, a pretty impressive achievement. And clearly if they have more wind in their next race, they might be able to (1) get further ahead of other monohulls, (2) possibly start mixing up w the fast multihulls.

Well done!

[antoineb]

...during a boat race on Lake Geneva, this past week-end.

Distance was a go-and-back course over Geneva-Rolle-Geneva, a mere 16nm (29km) each way.

Due to very very light winds especially on the way up it took us 13 hours (so a mere 2.4kn of average VMG), of which 8 hours to go up (so a mere 2.0kn). This in spite of us arriving in the top 20 percent of the monohulls (w many giving up).

We were often not far from Mirabaud LX and so could admire it, and could admire the battling spirit of its crew, doing their best to keep the boat straight (it has tiny safety buoyancy devices on the wings, to keep it from tipping over when stopped or in very light air, but each time they touch the water it obviously causes additional drag).

At the end of the day, Mirabaud finished in 13h23min, i.e. behind us in 13 hours on a Luthi 870 (a very nicely designed boat with modern sails), and they were also behind the 1st normal 18-footer (12h39).


Now that they've shown their determination and stamina over two boat races in very light airs, i.e. as far away as possible from the ideal conditions for their craft, it would be really really nice to see them hit winds high enough to allow them to fly, at least on part of the course. Just to have some fairness to the daring engineers ;-)