4 Meter mono foiler project

[foilman24]

It looks to me like your trying to get him to build the boat that you would build, not the one he has designed. why don't you switch gears and try to help the guy get this project rolling, not backtrack and bring up new problems and considerations. Why would anyone who had a rooting interest in this project suggest a redesign after he knows that the design has been finalized and production has started?

Go Sam GO!!!!!!! don't look back.

[wind_apparent]

wow, cheerleaders.....................

[bistros]

Originally Posted by wind_apparent

bistro's, you crack me up, always trying to mix "science" and "testing" with performance sailboats, thats just a bad idea.


all good points, "I" especially like the lighter/less drag argument. (thats what I think as well)



as far as angle of incidence control, I think it might be a great idea for this project. First, because a lot of respected and experienced mothies are looking into it and think it's worth messing with. And second, I'm not real sure how this hull is going to sit in the water, I don't want to guess and then find out that I need to yank out the foil case and change its angle.

Taken for what they are worth, my least hope for posting is to entertain!

I know I have irrational belief in testing, compiling data and evaluating results dispassionately. There is just no magic or religious fervor to my conclusions, and I try not to say anything that could be construed as conclusive without a repeatable proof. I'm a boring damned doubter who just lacks faith, excitement and conviction.

If I were a true believer, I would accept the posts written on the Sacred Blogs as carved in stone tablets and issued from the mouth of God. Sadly, I have no trust in anything written on the Internet, and living my faithless lifestyle has led me to question everything, even from Saint Rohan.

I think the F-box will save you a lot of F-words during tuning and testing. I also think that once you get things dialed in you will probably reduce the AOI settings to 2-3 positions, which may be able to be handled with a far simpler, positive and lighter setup.

As far as how the hull sits on it's design lines, that is really an operator issue. The thing is so light that your weight will always be the determining factor in things. Two inches of operator movement can completely alter trim.

[Paul B]

Originally Posted by Doug Lord

The gantry(in my opinion) is a rule induced abberation which is NOT necessary for a successfull foiler design. In fact, there are really good reasons why it should be eliminated:
2) In my humble opinion, it is somewhat ugly and help creates a "contraption" appearance to some onlookers.

I wonder who built this ugly Rube Goldberg Contraption?

Hoo Boy, POT meet KETTLE.

[wind_apparent]

bistro's, you crack me up, always trying to mix "science" and "testing" with performance sailboats, thats just a bad idea

I hope you didn't take offence, that wasn't what I intended, I was being sarcastic. I love your input, I am also a "prove it" kind of guy. Science, testing, and R&D are the only proof there is. give me numbers, pictures, and proof.

[bistros]

Originally Posted by wind_apparent

I hope you didn't take offence, that wasn't what I intended, I was being sarcastic. I love your input, I am also a "prove it" kind of guy. Science, testing, and R&D are the only proof there is. give me numbers, pictures, and proof.

Me? Take offense? Not. Sarcasm is a way of life in my family. The only disappointment with subtle sarcasm is that the intended recipients rarely get it.

[wind_apparent]

I think the F-box will save you a lot of F-words during tuning and testing. I also think that once you get things dialed in you will probably reduce the AOI settings to 2-3 positions, which may be able to be handled with a far simpler, positive and lighter setup.

Thats what I was thinking as well......

[wind_apparent]

so Doug, I was thinking about it last night (the whole gantry thing) and came up with this: There isn't a rule that says you cant build your gantry to exactly match the transom of the boat, so it someone wanted to "extend" the effective waterline of their boat by making the gantry a bolt on extension that matches the hull shape, well that would be fine. (if it was such a huge issue I'd think the mothies would be doing it already)

Originally Posted by wind_apparent

so Doug, I was thinking about it last night (the whole gantry thing) and came up with this: There isn't a rule that says you cant build your gantry to exactly match the transom of the boat, so it someone wanted to "extend" the effective waterline of their boat by making the gantry a bolt on extension that matches the hull shape, well that would be fine. (if it was such a huge issue I'd think the mothies would be doing it already)

=====================================
Now, that WOULD be heavy.....

[wind_apparent]

Now, that WOULD be heavy.....

how so? it wouldn't be that different or much bigger than the foam core carbon gantries the bladeriders use, you could even make a nice carbon tube space frame and mount a 3 layer carbon skin that matched the hull shape (like race car constrution) and it would effectively stop gantry induced drag.

In essence you'd have a double transom wouldn't you? If this is ok why not just leave it as a designers decision? Do you think the longer hull would have an advantage? The whole idea of the gantry seems to me sort of an after thought kind of thing-like I14's 18's and Moth's discovered at some point that they had to move everything back to make the boat work better.And now,unfortunately ,some think a foiler "needs' one....
Did you get the picture "fixed" so you could see it well enough to notice details?

[Paul B]

Originally Posted by wind_apparent

so Doug, I was thinking about it last night (the whole gantry thing) and came up with this: There isn't a rule that says you cant build your gantry to exactly match the transom of the boat, so it someone wanted to "extend" the effective waterline of their boat by making the gantry a bolt on extension that matches the hull shape, well that would be fine. (if it was such a huge issue I'd think the mothies would be doing it already)

You might find this as funny as some of the rest of us.

Why would **** **** want you to openly embrace a certain size increase, and also things like bouyancy bags?

Could it be due to the pre-existing sketch that **** **** tries to pass off as his own, but is actually sketched by someone else?

Guess ol' ****** won't be able to con anyone into coming up with a new design to the 4m parameter, so better to try to con you into modifying the rules to the "class" in the hope he can then con someone else into funding this boondoggle. I think he was hoping someone would give him $500K to design (right, someone else's design), develop, and produce this monument to his genius.


Why he can't just be like you and Bistros and design it, build it, and sail it continues to be a mystery to all. Probably his ego can't handle another public failure like his AeroStiff (Non)Foiler.

Paul B-you are a crude son of a bitch! That boat was designed by me with the sketch done by Eric Sponberg from the model in the pictures below. The design incorporates MANY things just now coming to the fore in monofoiler design including buoyancy pods(before the M4), adjustable angle of incidence main foil(before John Ilett),unstayed mast before everybody on a foiler.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jeff, if you delete"Paul B's" Crap, in deference to Sam's great thread, please delete this as well.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Features of the aeroSKIFF 14:
TARGET SPECIFICATIONS / aeroSKIFF 14 / based on 250lb. max crew-drawings in post 15 based on 220lb. max crew.
-------------------------------------------
1) LOA 14'8" Beam 12'(drawings in post 15 show 10' beam-beam may be increased to reduce buoyancy pod size and to help make crew weight range wider)
-------------------------------------------
2) Target ready to fly boat weight: 120 lb.s
--------------------------------------------
3) Max Crew 250lb.s ; target minimum crew 120lb. -----------------------------------------------
4) Flying weight: 370lb.s
-----------------------------------------------
5) SA 143 sq.ft. square topped, camber induced , main only, unstayed mast ,extended luff, modified wishbone, midboom sheeting.
-----------------------------------------------
6) Standard main foil area 1.68 sq.ft.
-----------------------------------------------
7) Mainfoil loading @ 80% 176lb. sq. ft.
-----------------------------------------------
8) Rudder foil area 50% mainfoil area.
-----------------------------------------------
9) SA/mainfoil area: 85sq. ft. per sq.ft. foil area.
-----------------------------------------------
10) "Wing Loading"( all up weight divided by SA) =2.58lb.s per sq.ft. SA.
------------------------------------------------
11) Draft ,off foils; foils extended= 3.75'-variable.
===============================================
Features
===============================================
1) Forward third of sail comes completely down to the deck; the boom is a modified version of a wishbone boom with a cross member just forward of mid length that takes the mainsheet. The sheet is led to a traveller on the forward beam allowing the sheet to come from forward. A twin vang set up will be used should a vang be required.
-----------------------------------------------
2) Foils retract to facilitate beach launching.
-----------------------------------------------
3) Sliding single bench seat; slides easily and contains ballast compartment for one design class weight equalization system.Motion control system that prevents runaway seat in adverse situations.
----------------------------------------------
4) Standard foils optimized for low speed takeoff; optional tip extentions; optional high speed foils.
-----------------------------------------------
5) Buoyancy pods approx 1.56 cu' per side; larger optional pods available for training.(see approx 3 cu. ft. pods illustrated in the sketches in post #15)
-----------------------------------------------
6)Rudder: unique design slides up and down in daggerboard style slot; stepped rudder flap designed to allow variable rudder area between non foiling and foiling; Target is to have rudder throw and sensitivity the same on or off
foils.
-----------------------------------------------
7) Double ended hull facilitates earlist 0 to takeoff; facillitates pitch change to allow early takeoff though foil system may not require this.
-----------------------------------------------
8) Trampoline each side with heel cutouts allowing quick, secure seat movement.
-----------------------------------------------
9) Foils designed to take loads imposed by jumping which can be initiated by twisting hiking stick(s).System bypasses wand but still utilizes forward /rear foil interconnect.
-----------------------------------------------
10) Variable main foil "gear shift" angle of incidence adjustment. From "set it and forget it" to fine tuning main foil drag.
-----------------------------------------------
11) Exceptionally wide crew weight range ; one design cass races wil be sailed at the 250 lb.s crew weight. Speed runs will be able to be made with lower crew weight as long as RM is addressed.
----------------------------------------------
12) Wand controlled altitude with height adjustment. Set it and forget it or tweak it. Unique averaging wand system to improve choppy water response including fore and aft foil interconnect and wand bypass for smoother flying and better jumps.
----------------------------------------
Jumping is an important part of this foiler design because we think it will add to the value of the boat and to the fun of flying this foiler.
__________________
Doug Lord

[foilman24]

Jumping is an important part of this foiler design because we think it will add to the value of the boat and to the fun of flying this foiler.

this is the dumbest thing ever. And look, now doug has once again turned someone else's thread into a billboard for the "Doug Lord retard machine"

no one wants to hear your tired song and dance, this foiler is a cool idea, why do you take it upon yourself to constantly push your own lameness onto this project (and every one else's threads) ? I have an idea, why don't you start a thread about the "Retard Machine" and see if it gets even close to the response that this Sr-71 has? (oh ya, because nobody cares and you are maybe the most loathed personality in the wide world of sailing).

by the way, you might want to check out SA, looks like your tiller twist control is a big hit.

[wind_apparent]

WOW............I'm tired of playing ref on this thread, and I would maybe try to stop everyone from derailing it, but its getting so funny . The best part it that the design has already been completed, the plans have been sent to the CNC, and construction has already started, I'm not changing a thing......ha ha ha ha ha ha (sinister laugh).