Veal Heel for Multihull Foilers

Doug, at 1.5 to 2 degrees negative angle of attack, IMO you're still getting plenty of positive lift - and I'm pretty sure you have to go a lot further than 2 degrees to get continuous negative results.
I can alter incident angle on FH by lifting or lowering the float angle and then re-glueing (but I won't); the foils are fixed ... and are angled down so that when the boat heels, the foils still remain immersed. I don't want them breaking the surface and losing lift.

 

Gary, do you not find that the foils are operating in that no mans land of very near the surface or are they just an aid to semi lifting the ama, I would have thought you may have put them down lower a bit to be in more stable water.

Dave J, IMO a foiling a cat is really not going to be easy, T foils on the rear and a more efficient hull shape to suit maybe a good half way house solution, add in a base on the mast to move it to leeward to reduce the righting moment of the sail and it could get interesting.

Chris O, why do you bother to piss so many people off with your insistance on contributing to foiling threads which you obviously have no interest in other than trying to be negative to anything Doug L writes. Wake up to reality fellow, it must cost you so many hours of your life which could be so easily used more usefully elsewhere, all that wasted time certainly doesn't contribute much to foiling.

 

-------------------------
Gary, you know that a 63412 foil is an asymetric foil but in this case operates upside down,right? This particular foil develops lift in its"normal" right side up attitude down to -1 degrees! The range that I described the foil operating in is approximately the same range it operated in when used on a Moth.....
---
Also, Gary, keep in mind the Power Foil is controlled by a wand so any sudden decrease or increase of heeling force is instantly compensated by wand+flap movement.

 

Go look, again, at the posts my boy and you'll see that there are some serious questions being asked within the content. The fact that Doug wants to ignore that for which he has no pat answers, doesn't make them a waste of time. It makes them significant roadblocks to his Pollyanna world of foiling. I'd like to think that you have a bit more on the ball than Doug, but it merely looks like you're just another DL apologist.

On the 8th, Doug said this, "Dave, the outboard foil pulls down, not up like the main foil." In return, I asked this question, "And if the wind shuts off, such as one might encounter in heavy, gusting conditions, that groovy outboard foil just might pull your fanny right on over on your backside where you get to swim while trying to physically avoid the pointy ends and edges of the outboard foil in the turbulent water."

Now, all by itself, Doug's statement is fairly straight-forward, but when one takes into account that the foil in question is mounted way out on the end of the boat's beam, it spells nothing but trouble should the wind drop off suddenly. The boat doesn't come to an instant and dead stop, Wayne. The foil keeps on pulling down, the weight of the pilot is already out on the end of the wing going hard for the windward heel and suddenly, all that weight, negative lift and a coupled upward lift from the main foil will put the guy in the water, summarily. Then the boat comes to a dead stop. No lift anywhere.

Doug doesn't want to answer that question, because it demonstrates a flaw in his so-called wonder boat with too many foils. Apparently, you aren't equipped to answer the issue, either.

So, there's the non-concerned, non-engaged question for you, Wayne... and especially you, Douglas. What happens to all the lovely downward force that this design iteration is supposed to supply, when the wind shuts-off suddenly and the driver is hanging off in a hard-over windward heel? What happens when the negative lift, combined with the main foil positive lift, rotates the boat around its longitudinal axis and pulls half of the main foil out of the water? Oh, I know, it's Doug's tasty manual wand that prevents disaster. The same wand that he automatically screws while his butt is falling backwards off the boat. Doug's all-wet and he still clings to his fabulous, world-beating ideas.

All of these so-called balancing forces are entirely dependent on the wind and having it be a steady, regular force on the sail. Now, I wish that were true for where you sail, guys, but it has never been that way at any of the places where I have sailed. It's gusty, shifty and entirely operating with a will of its own. When you get to where you control the wind, you let me know.

I say that this boat is a crash course in how to make something way too complicated for no real gain in the sailing experience. I say that when and if, Doug ever manages to get this thing out on the water, that it will not be sailed successfully with these outboard foils engaged. Prove me wrong on the water, gentlemen, or learn to acquire a gourmand's taste for crow.

 

Yawwwwwwnnn, why spoil these threads? Why don't you just stay away from them?

 

uk brownie...

With one post to your credit, I wonder just who you might be...? The transparency is so obvious it hurts.

What do you say, brownie, you just sit back in a big old comfy chair and watch for a awhile before you bring your brand of commentary to the Forum?

Unless you're the same Brownie who so totally screwed-up the US government's response to Hurricane Katrina. George W. Bush to the chosen one... "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_D._Brown I guess that you are now dodging the US press by living in the UK. Good move as long as you lay low.

Then, by all means, share with us your magnificent foiling insight from having judged a bunch of horse shows and so completely duncing your responsibilities in a great time of need.

I guess you noticed that your boy, Doug, has not responded yet. My prediction... Doug will not respond because he has no response short of anouncing that he's so totally miscalculated his wing mounted foils thing that it's too embarassing to announce the fact openly. He'll just go on with his Emporer's New Clothes posturing, while all the apologists stand in line and lap it up. I've saved his "drawing", so there's no chance to alter said diagram to prove his point after the fact.

Again, fellows, build the boat as specifiied by Doug and prove me wrong. The meal suggestion still applies.

 

Chris on the above point I happen to agree but my point to you is that you just bang on and on and on and on as soon as something is not answered to your satisfaction. Its boringly repetatitve and destroys any hope that other people will join into what is a boat design forum. Make your point once and move on, let other people decide whether they agree or not.

I'm sure you have been in a conversation with others when some pontificating prat tries to butt in and get an answer to some minute little thing and won't give up until its answered to their satisfaction, it kills conversation stone dead and everyone moves on to the bar leaving only the two protaganists disputing some minor irritating small point.

 

Noted, Wayne, but since you have not chosen to call Doug on this obvious flaw, the point should be made again, until Doug finally gets that it's total BS to pursue the design solution over and over until it hurts to see it posted. When you, or anyone else here, call him out, I'll stop posting the point. I'm not hurt because I make an observation that rings true.

Critical examination is a necessity when it comes to proposing a design in which there are no previous examples from which to draw. Instead of making the obvious observation on your own, you have, instead, chosen to launch an Ad Hominem attack on me... as if the fact will somehow go away and you'll get to be all snuggly again.

Get this... I'm all for Doug being able to post his overly complicated "solutions" for speculative boat designs. I'm also all for being able to observe said presentations, make my own decisions based on common sense and my own knowledge and then make them poignantly public. Interesting that it took being called out for a crow dinner, before you openly copped to the point yourself. I don't have a beef with you, Wayne, other than you continue to allow this kind of nonsense to be put forth when you certainly know better than to let it just lay there unopposed.

There are things, which can be shared by Doug for the betterment of all. Trouble is, he's fallible and refuses to admit the fact. Doing so would allow him to be much more of a human and then we all win. I don't pretend to know all the background complexities that drive that function, nor will I pontificate on the topic, as I'm not a psychologist.

What say you pound on Doug as to that issue and we'll see how far you get? Then, I can ask you how it's going in a few weeks and we'll see if going to the pub for a pint and a fun talk isn't a better idea.

 

=================
Wayne read post 124-the Power Foil(s) is controlled by a wand just like the main foil-it will respond instantly to any change in heeling force....And thats not the first mention of the wand control of altitude on the Power Foil-it has been mentioned several times starting on page 1 in post 13......

 

And that's why there are videos all over the place of spectaular Moth crashes.

Get real Doug.

The answer is that there just so many things you can put on a boat before it all makes no sense at all. Why not find some powerful and fundamental design solutions to rig drag, overall boat shape drag, crew clothing that has a smaller drag signature and a better sail, before you confuse yourself with all this stuff that only makes the maintenance nightmare fly through the roof?

For an example, AMAC is now trying out the next generation of sails on his boat, even though he just won the Aussie Championship by a good margin. Now, why would he do that when he could just ignore the sail and go off on a tangent regarding extra foils?

There's just so much with which to concern yourself regarding existing forms, that pimping yourself on the use of excessive foilery is well into the, "what do we need this for?" category.

Now, if you actually had a suitable prototype shop and proper funding in order to splash this kind of effort... hey, more power to you. But, we all know that isn't the reality of things in Lord's Boat Shed, or there would be all sorts of wacky and wild stuff flying out the door, to coin a phrase.

If you really want to make an impact on flying, foil-borne boats, then the only real thing that matters is building that which you think is so cool and showing us how it all works from your vision. Baigent does this, as well as a dozen other modest contributors to these pages. Typically, these guys recognize that change is made incrementally and trying like hell to jump the line with a thing that hasn't ever been done, is not the way to get things accomplished. One eases into the next iteration, so that the lessons learned are pushed deep into the consciousness.

You've spent a good bit of your life documenting the transition from Oldie But Goodie, seahugger Moths to foiling machines, Doug. Look at how long that took with several, very creative and qualified people going at it with real gusto, as well as the money to spend on the effort. Since you have no cash, what do you think is going to get you to the promised land of being a foiling innovator...? Hyperbole, speculation and lots of posts on discussion fora?

I wish that were so and after banging the gong myself on several different, though much less "out there" ideas, it is finally coming together for me as a real mark on the boat design canvas. Believe me, I admire that you have the willingness to prostrate yourself so regularly, but that, all by itself, is not going to get you to the promised land. It takes that energy with a thoughtfully measured conceptual approach, in order to put boats out there that folks are going to find attractive. Burning a hole in the wild end of the design spectrum, as it were, is more than likely to scare people away and leave you twiddling. Ask Mr. Tucker about his venture into automobile design, if you don't believe me.

Right now, this boat you suggest is going to be festooned with wands, just like a Hermit Crab scuttling across the bottom of the sea. They will all require finite adjustment, a decent degree of maintenance and a whole bunch of added expense... and all that fiddling will not guarantee success as a useful craft compared to others.

Please, Doug, point yourself at the real issues of the day and leave the complexity alone as an answer to what will work.

 

Not sure what is transparent?

I'm just a normal uk based dinghy sailor that sails round the cans each weekend, who has sailed a lot of Moths over the years by the way, that enjoys reading the threads theorising about possible foil developments and high performance dinghies.

I’m fed up of you being unable to put forward a valid opposing point of view in any foiling thread without being patronising or personnel towards Doug and vandalising the thread for the rest of us. Unfortunately during some research I'm doing into a home built design I will be building I keep coming across your trash.

I won’t bother continuing as I am now guilty of the same behaviour, however you should considering speaking with someone or getting some medication to help with your obsession, it’s not healthy.

Aaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh and relax.

 

Doug, my stupidity .... just shows how you can get into a rut, thinking a foil should be mounted conventionally to provide lift upwards - of course mount the asymmetric foil inverted .... okay, you're going to get plenty of negative forces that way ..... but I see Sod's Law on the horizon, as Chris has been pointing out, but IMO you're asking for trouble relying on downward forces to keep your platform in balance - also, even with adjustments to hand, sounds too complicated for me. I'm for simplicity.
Wayne, the floats on Flash Harry are a fine V, with rocker, so even without the foil, that lower area of the float is immersed, a bit like a fine foil in cross section itself. But with the foil there and providing high lift at speed, the foil is always beneath the surface (still in undisturbed water) with the V of the float just kissing the top. Earlier I had the foil blades mounted deeper .... but then it was a ******* shifting the boat in shallow water because the foils were lower than the main hull. So took a chance and reduced blades to only a couple of inches. So far, everything is working fine. Cheers.

 

Now that you've humanized yourself, you are invited to the pub as well.

 

=========
Windward foil negative lift has worked well on Long Shot(feeler), the Trifoiler(feeler), the Rave(wand),the Osprey(wand-soon) and the F3(wand)-thats a good heritage that works for me...

 

Doug: The Russians design by building their aircraft, whilst the Americans will sit down at computers and design by theories. I guess what i'm trying to say Doug is build what you have now, and then solve your problems by experiancing them instead of theorising about solution for problems you have no data for.

or even better in Aussie terms: Just build the bloody thing and prove all those yobbo's wrong.