16-18' "Sit-in" Planing Monohull ("Trapwing")

[Chris Ostlind]

Then the boat you should be trying to beat is my Montage. A bit longer and wider, much faster and it eats Claptraps for breakfast.

Montage Specifications

LOA 15′ 6″
BOA 12′
BOA main hull 41″

Main 110 sq. ft.
Jib 38 sq. ft.
Screacher 102 sq. ft.

Displacement 650 lbs.
Weight 235 lbs.


... and look, Ma! No electrics on board to mess with the sailing

Originally Posted by Chris Ostlind

Then the boat you should be trying to beat is my Montage. A bit longer and wider, much faster and it eats Claptraps for breakfast.

Montage Specifications

LOA 15′ 6″
BOA 12′
BOA main hull 41″

Main 110 sq. ft.
Jib 38 sq. ft.
Screacher 102 sq. ft.

Displacement 650 lbs.
Weight 235 lbs.


... and look, Ma! No electrics on board to mess with the sailing

-----------------------
Great looking tri! But the Trapwing is self-righting and likely at least as fast sailed by the same weight crew. And the trapwing crew doesn't have to crawl around a tramp. He/she just sits there enjoying the incredible sensations of beating a trimaran with a monohull......

[Paul B]

Originally Posted by Chris Ostlind

Then the boat you should be trying to beat is my Montage. A bit longer and wider, much faster and it eats Claptraps for breakfast.

Montage Specifications

LOA 15′ 6″
BOA 12′
BOA main hull 41″

Main 110 sq. ft.
Jib 38 sq. ft.
Screacher 102 sq. ft.

Displacement 650 lbs.
Weight 235 lbs.


... and look, Ma! No electrics on board to mess with the sailing

No, you both have to beat my Quaalude 16:

LOA: 16.000'
LWL: 16.002' (figure that one out)
BOA: Top Secret
RM 1d: 800.027 ft-lbs

SA (upwind): 650.746 sq. ft.
SA (down): Unlimited

Weight: 128.254 lbs.

Originally Posted by Cheesy

As you already have some power consumption figures what actuator and control system are you going to be using? off the shelf?

------------------------
Don't know yet-but I hope it will be off the shelf. What I do know is that it will be proportional control-similar to the control you have with an RC version.

[sigurd]

the blue boat has one of those rams in the front... whereas the other has a catapult... hard to tell who will die first... all up to the ferocity of the crew...

Originally Posted by sigurd

the blue boat has one of those rams in the front... whereas the other has a catapult... hard to tell who will die first... all up to the ferocity of the crew... I will be descending from teh skies on you

-------------------------
Hah! hilarious-good one!

[Chris Ostlind]

Originally Posted by Doug Lord

He/she just sits there enjoying the incredible sensations of beating a trimaran with a monohull......

First of all, thanks for the compliment. Moving on now...

A couple of items.

1. Is this what it's about... the desperate need to make a mono into a weak link example of a multihull? That's a no win scenario, Doug, and you know it.

2. This imaginary he/she also gets to do all sorts of maintenance in order to keep said boat on the water often enough to make it worthwhile. In the meantime, the simple, go-fast trimaran is out enjoying the wind and the water with hundreds of additional sailing hours per season.

Give us an estimation of what it's gonna take to put this boat on the water, cost wise and then run a simple calc as to how many man hours it returns per dollar after you back-out the maintenance hassles.

A simple ratio will show the real truth about owning an overly complicated craft. I know you like numbers, Doug, so gin that up. Include, if you will, the extra ownership cost for tweaked parts, fussy track systems, burnt-out motors and dead as a door nail batteries.

Comparatively speaking, when weighed against the Montage, this is a very spendy little doo-dad. Spendy, fussy boats do not win admirers with the audience for whom you say the boat is targeted.

Originally Posted by Chris Ostlind

First of all, thanks for the compliment. Moving on now...

A couple of items.

1. Is this what it's about... the desperate need to make a mono into a weak link example of a multihull? That's a no win scenario, Doug, and you know it.

.

=====================
My,my how quickly we forget! The Moth has re-written the history of the mono vs multi wars with a VERY WINNING SCENARIO and so will the Trapwing-in its own special way. The Moth has beaten EVERY multihull under 20' and,as you know, is on the cutting edge of that revolution everybody is talking about.
Well, the Trapwing is no Moth but has its own revolutionary flavor-something like the "fastest self-righting singlehander under 20' where the crew does nothing but move his/her hands". Maybe that's too complicated,how about:
"Multihull Speed with No Physical Effort or Capsizes". Still too complicated? Well hell, this oughta do it: "Thrills Without Spills".
Thats what its all about.....
--------------
Weta
LOA 14'
SA 123.9 sq.ft +spin
weight-220lb(some have said the weta is 240 all up)
=====================
Trapwing
LOA-16-18+
SA 160sq.ft. +spin
Weight-271-320lb.

[Paul B]

Originally Posted by Doug Lord

=====================
My,my how quickly we forget!

Some do not forget so quickly.

The idjit promoting this waste of bandwidth is the same idjit who tried but could not build a foiling boat like a moth.

So with that disaster as the historic precedent, why would anyone believe this would ever see the light of day.

Soon this will be dropped like so many other "discussions" (rants really) about non-existent boats. It will be on to column inches about a 60 foot version, then a 100 foot version, then a version with a kite and a foil coming out of the side of the boat, then a version that will foil upwind and plane downwind, ...

Crazed posts about all this techno-weenie flagellation for what, 8 years? Not one technical drawing from the loon that spouts all of this stuff.

Amazing...

[Chris Ostlind]

Originally Posted by Doug Lord

My,my how quickly we forget! The Moth has re-written the history of the mono vs multi wars with a VERY WINNING SCENARIO and so will the Trapwing-in its own special way. The Moth has beaten EVERY multihull under 20' and,as you know, is on the cutting edge of that revolution everybody is talking about.

A moth is no longer a monohull, Doug... it's a foiler. You might as well say that a Top Fuel dragster is a car for soccer mom's. Form a relevant argument, will you? This just looks like a wayward peyote nightmare.

Originally Posted by Doug Lord

Well, the Trapwing is no Moth but has its own revolutionary flavor-something like the "fastest self-righting singlehander under 20' where the crew does nothing but move his/her hands". Maybe that's too complicated,how about:
"Multihull Speed with No Physical Effort or Capsizes". Still too complicated? Well hell, this oughta do it: "Thrills Without Spills".
Thats what its all about.....

Doug, a neighborhood ice cream truck has a revolutionary flavor.

Steve Clark poignantly asked you the question, "what does this thing do that isn't already done by a multihull?" What is implied along with that question... Why add complexity? Why add maintenance issues? Why add associated mechanical problems?... all to achieve nothing of merit with no guarantee that the boat could out-perform any multihull of similar weight and sail area.

So, you've been told by a designer of small craft, an engineer, a whole host of savvy sailors and creators over on SA and now, on these pages, by Steve Clark, a guy whose credentials in these kinds of things are above question... The Idea Is Essentially A Waste Of Time.

For the record my 16 footer foiled-but rather poorly-just don't have any pictures of it foiling so the "pictures or it never happened " crowd of nutcases try their best to re-write history. www.monofoiler.com
-----------------
"of savvy sailors and creators over on SA .." What a joke! Here-read what the "savvy sailors and creators" on SA say. http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/ind...&#entry2181498 Ninety percent of the posts there including Ostlinds are trash with the exception of a few people including Steve Clark-whose opinion I respect( I posted his SA criticism here). I have answered ,point for point, everything regarding the Trapwing IN DETAIL completely refuting every point made against it on this thread by the so-called engineer-or anyone else. I value constructive criticism and the effort made by Mark and am very grateful to Rick for his exploration of the power required but have nothing but contempt for the other kinds of posts here and on SA.
The fact is that this is a NEW idea that has some roots in boats of the past-but the implementation of this concept is completely new and different than anything done in the past.This concept provides an exciting NEW way to sail from a perspective that is not available anywhere today. It has the potential to offer older people and disabled people a new high performance way to sail much faster-and much safer- than they can now. Ablebodied sailors can sail this boat at its maximum potential -with or without its self-righting capability.
Thrills Without Spills!

[Steve Clark]

So scale up he Challenger to:
LOA 18
BMax 12
SA 150 ft^2
Weight 200.
Imagine a sit in the middle A Class trimaran....
SHC
Forget I mentioned it.

[Paul B]

Originally Posted by Steve Clark

So scale up he Challenger to:
LOA 18
BMax 12
SA 150 ft^2
Weight 200.
Imagine a sit in the middle A Class trimaran....
SHC
Forget I mentioned it.

A couple of questions:

1. How many lifting foils does it have?

2. How much lead are you shifting, what distance, and at what speed? What mechanism are you using to shift the lead, and how are you powering it?

[Paul B]

Originally Posted by Doug Lord

I have answered ,point for point, everything regarding the Trapwing IN DETAIL completely refuting every point made against it

No, you simpleton, to COMPLETELY refute every point made you will have to build a proof of concept and show everyone how it works.

But "build" is an action verb, so you will never do it.

Once again, you back yourself into a corner, ball up your little fists, and lash out.

The only thing you will ever be remembered for is being the looniest loser posting on internet forums in the early 2000s.

Interesting to see the various reactions to this concept .