Foiler Design

[Paul Scott]

So I'll grab some courage and restate what I deleted when faced with the Pompous Pangolin's dissaproval- 2 main points;

1) I was wondering whether the difficulty of sailing the present Moth setup was it's allure- if there was a slightly slower but non crashing -as in stopping- Moth, would it be considered 'worthy of the challenge'?

2) I was making a comparo to Div II sailboards, and why the Lechner was chosen rather than the Davidsson or Alpha, for that matter- I was heavily invested emotionally in 'the purity of it all' at the time, although I was a Davidsson guy. The Lechner was by far the hardest to sail of the lot. Whether it was fastest?

Paul

[Chris Ostlind]

Hey Paul...

Couple of things.

1. Ask this question over at the Sailing Anarchy Dinghy Anarchy Forum
http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showforum=21

There are, literally, many dozens of active Moth foiler types over there and they just love to give their take on stuff such as this.

2. Chris249 (Chris Thompson, actually, if you do a search and query his screen name for a PM or email) used to be a very active and serious sailboarder in OZ and knows the history of things, as well as the pscyh/philosophy of the genre. Hit the guy with your question for a possible reward.

He may even know of Pangolin

[sigurd]

Originally Posted by Paul Scott

1) I've windsurfed on a foil (the Delta arrangement), and one foil seemed right for the feel of the balance of things (which, like on smaller boards, feels to me to be over one point, but that's straight line, not carving through a jibe), I've only kitesurfed a few times, but the feel on the board is really different, where the whole board feels loaded up, like the whole thing is consantly carving rather than just balancing over one point, so having one foil seems like an invitation to fall over the nose, so as it was pointed out, it's difficult really power up the kite.

2)Fair enough, sorry for the diversion.

1)Good point, maybe the tail needs to have a vertical area as well, or something. We shall see.

2)No problem, really.

[bistros]

Originally Posted by Doug Lord

The fact is that most of the R & D that has gone into monofoilers has been in the direction of the highest possible round the cans performance.
Very little R & D has been put into making an easy to sail foiler and there is tremendous potential in that avenue of development-both for monofoilers and multifoilers. Any analysis that projects the downside of some high performance
foilers onto an as yet non-existent Peoples Foiler is very shortsighted and does not take into consideration what has already been learned that can produce(and already has produced ,in some instances) dramatic improvements in boat handling, ease of launching, ease of non-foiling handling etc.
Designs that allow a fixed keel boat to only foil downwind,a dinghy that only foils downwind, designs that increase RM of fast monohulls, that partially foil upwind and downwind and designs that plane with foil assist are all areas where foil technology will be applied to sailing in a completely new way with very little in common with the high performance boats we've seen so far.

Utter nonsense.

Mr. Ketterman DID make your people's foiler - and it wasn't a huge success because not enough people were interested. Dr. Sam made a few too - and he didn't get rich selling them like hotcakes. These were sit down, sailable by normal people foilers, and they didn't sell even though they did not require Saint Rohan Veal to sail them.

Face reality. Foiling is cool. Foiling gives you a damp spot in your jockey shorts. Foiling is one of the highest performance sailing options. Foiling isn't a universal appeal sport.

Because foiling is an elite performance niche, the people doing the bulk of the development are going to be focused on pushing the high end of the envelope - and they aren't going to concentrate on dumbing down performance to increase appeal to the masses. As a niche market, high cost materials are going to be de riguer choices, and the developers are going to expect the buyers will be highly skilled and motivated athletes.

Your concept of foiling keelboats and foil assist adds weight, complexity and cost to address a problem no one is trying to solve in the mass market. Joe Sixpack sailing his J24 or U20 isn't interested in gaining 15% performance at a 50% cost increase. Only high end elite racing programs like RTW races and people seeking record passages are candidates.

[Paul Scott]

Originally Posted by Paul Scott

So I'll grab some courage and restate what I deleted when faced with the Pompous Pangolin's dissaproval- 2 main points;

1) I was wondering whether the difficulty of sailing the present Moth setup was it's allure- if there was a slightly slower but non crashing -as in stopping- Moth, would it be considered 'worthy of the challenge'?

2) I was making a comparo to Div II sailboards, and why the Lechner was chosen rather than the Davidsson or Alpha, for that matter- I was heavily invested emotionally in 'the purity of it all' at the time, although I was a Davidsson guy. The Lechner was by far the hardest to sail of the lot. Whether it was fastest?

Paul

Fair enough- and although I'm not going to to pursue the subject more here, my intention was, I think, in hindsight at any rate, to argue that the human interface with the water, which is broadly the technology we're talking about, or the interface with the machine is a design decision, and once you start flying above the water rather than going through it, or skimming over it, can it hurt to examine your assumptions intentionally?

Chris and I have gone around and around on the DII stuff.

This idea, with me as it's caddy, now exuents, stage right.

Paul

[Paul Scott]

Originally Posted by sigurd

1)Good point, maybe the tail needs to have a vertical area as well, or something. We shall see.

2)No problem, really.

I suppose one way of looking at a kiteboard as it is now would be as a rudimentary inclined large low aspect foil- ( ), of what, AR .2- .25?

I wonder if you could adapt a Bruce foil? That would have the opposite inclination that the board now has... 2 ogivalish sections like ring wings with a longitudinal flotation bar in between? Strap your feet over the foils? In some of the boards, you strap your feet near the skegs anyway.

Paul

Originally Posted by bistros

Utter nonsense.

========================
I don't think so. To claim ,however facetiously, that the Hobie Trifoiler or Rave were failed "Peoples Foilers" is far from accurate. Both boats use what is now old technology- by any standard-and while cool for their time -are in no way "Peoples Foiler's". A "Peoples Foiler"- by definition- will be wildly successful or it is not a peoples foiler.
This thread is the ideal place to tackle the issues raised by the new bi-foiling technology, control system advances etc. and to look at new developments across a wide spectrum of the application of foils to sailing. No one can judge the efficacies of developments that haven't sailed yet or rule out the potential of ANY new technology -such as foiling keelboats -on the basis of the very short history of bi-foiling technology.
=============
See the very interesting NEW NZ TV footage of the new R Class foiler here: New High Performance Monofoilers

[Chris Ostlind]

Originally Posted by Doug Lord

...To claim ,however facetiously, that the Hobie Trifoiler or Rave were failed "Peoples Foilers" is far from accurate. Both boats use what is now old technology- by any standard-and while cool for their time -are in no way "Peoples Foiler's". A "Peoples Foiler"- by definition- will be wildly successful or it is in not a peoples foiler.

If they were not People's Foilers for their day, then what, exactly, were they? They certainly were marketed as such, they were wishfully priced as such, they were made (in the case of the Rave) from materials that most folks deem as People's Boat Plastic, or polyethylene, if you want to be more specific and they were each put out by companies that seriously fancied themselves as Joe Sixpack outfits. I mean, come on Doug, how much more "Joe Beach Sailing Dude" can you get than Hobie, fer chrissakes?

Wildly successful, huh? Is that a moving target, or just what, exactly? Ya think something like 120 units a year, or something along those lines will get ya wild and successful in the same sentence? I would guess that you don't mean wildly, as in Hobie16 sales figures wild, now would you? Now, that's what I call wildly successful and frankly, I don't see any foiler ever getting to that lofty place in the boat world.

So, what we are left with is a boat that maybe will turn a couple of hundred a year that has all the same limitations that I listed recently and a price tag to go with it. I know your response here, Doug and I'll address the topic below in the next response to the next point you are offering.

Problems everywhere and an uncertain sales potential with non-existent numbers to plug into the crystal ball. Sounds iffy to me.

Originally Posted by Doug Lord

This thread is the ideal place to tackle the issues raised by the new bi-foiling technology, control system advances etc. and to look at new developments across a wide spectrum of the application of foils to sailing. No one can judge the efficacies of developments that haven't sailed yet or rule out the potential of ANY new technology -such as foiling keelboats -on the basis of the very short history of bi-foiling technology.

First of all, the history of foiling craft is not at all short and this twin foil thing has benefited enormously from every developmental bit that came before it. It's not like this stuff just flopped out of thin air. The controls, the foils themselves, the need for stringent weight control, the hulls of the Moths and just about any other twin foil boat out there, all originated from well-known products that have had lengthy R&D sessions to work out the bugs... or so you keep reminding us about the work of Dr. Sam, anyway.

Twin foiled boats are not revolutionary thinking, they are incrementally progressive developments that fit quite nicely with the term, evolutionary. Produce a marine ready, anti-magnetic device to levitate the boat from the water, leaving only the daggerboard and rudder still wet, while you sail away to your heart's content... now that's revolutionary. Foils that have been around for a very long time and stuck up the fanny of a Moth, as interesting an application as they are, do not meet the revolution definition.

The sentence above, in which you address the issue that... no one can judge, etc., etc,... While that may be true, you are also going to have to stick with the axiom and apply it to the opposite side of the equation, Doug. Because these, "possible" boats of the future have not been realized, you can not suppose, or judge their full potential, or... and this is the key part here, their limitations. If folks are not allowed to criticize the unknown, then you are not allowed to hype for benefit, the same unknown. Ya' gotta apply the standard across the board if you expect anyone to listen to the pitch.

The unknown price tag, here, Doug. You know, the place in the first argument where I said you'd have an objection? Well, here's the answer...

You don't know what the future holds, ether beneficial to your argument or counter to same. Speculating that some magic build material is going to appear and save the price point/build properties day for the "People's Foiler" is like holding your breath and waiting for the next visit by Halley's Comet. Yeah, it might come along for us once again, and just as easily... yeah, it might hit something out there in the blackness of space and just fall out of the Cosmos.

Like you said, Doug, there are just too many questions to be making pronouncements of fact and on that point I share your position. Perhaps now, a reasonable discussion can move forward?

Originally Posted by Chris Ostlind

Twin foiled boats are not revolutionary thinking, they are incrementally progressive developments that fit quite nicely with the term, evolutionary.

---------------------------
Absurd. I asked one of the top foiler designers around about bi-foiling BEFORE the Moth success with just two foils and he was convinced it could not work.
No successfull sailing bi-foiler in the first 50 years of foiling then BAM!-in 1999 there was. Yes,it is a revolution!
Misunderstanding the significance of sailing on just two foils may lead you to think "evolution" but it is far from that-a very young technology that is changing the face of sailing.
The potential of the technology is extraordinary because of its simplicity and wide application to dinghies , multihulls, sportboats, large keel boats, including "foil assist" designs across the spectrum.
Numerous people in a growing number of classes are experimenting with bi-foiler technology-with the R Class set to adopt the tech class wide soon.
Not a revolution? Who would have thought that an 11' monohull would wind up as the fastest sailboat(beating all monos and multihulls) under 20'?
Hopefully, on these pages, as time goes by we can explore how to make this technology less expensive ,more accesible and help it to realize its enormous potential to affect sailing in a positive way and to produce boats with capabilities in reality that can only be speculated about now.

[Paul B]

Originally Posted by Doug Lord

---------------------------

Hopefully, on these pages, as time goes by we can explore how to make this technology less expensive ,more accesible and help it to realize its enormous potential to affect sailing in a postive way and to produce boats with capabilities in reality that can only be speculated about now.

Seem to me no one is interested in doing your work for you.

Once again, a collection of the same old photos, and ol' Druggie not associated with any of them.

His pile o' parts, low tech heavy hull, foils unlike all the ones that actually work, and an overly complicated and draggy rig, will never actually foil.

[Chris Ostlind]

Originally Posted by Doug Lord

Absurd...

Is this where I get to toss a few vitriolic invectives of my own just to drive home the point? Don't you think the folks here deserve a conversation that is, at once spirited, but refrains from the kinds of words you like to use when things don't quite go as planned?

Doug, you've managed to turn a thoughtful and well-reasoned discussion into a pissing match with one utterance from your pre-disposed head. This is the same kind of stuff that got you tossed from Sailing Anarchy. Are you really sure you'd like to get that going here, as well?

As for a foiling revolution just because some boats in the last decade have used a twin foil application....

Please take a look at the types of boats that have been out there in the foiling world over the last century, or so. There've been all sorts of combinations of types of foils, placement of foils, propulsion systems for foiling craft, different designations for which ones do the heavy lifting and which do not.

There have been ladder foils, surface piercing foils, four foil boats, three foil boats, one foil boats. Let's see now... graphically that progression looks like this:

Question #9 Please indicate the missing number in the following sequence

4 3 _ 1


This is the kind of reasoning question that is asked in the third grade, Doug, when the placement test asks a kid to figure out which number would go in the blank space. Kids with IQ's well below the national mean get this one right all the time and you think that's revolutionary.

Truly remarkable

A two-foil boat is a progression of established thinking, it is not a revolutionary thought. Nobody is going to get a Nobel Prize for a twin foil boat. The National Science Academy is not going to have you out for the annual, White Tie Dinner. MIT and Caltech will not come banging down your door with an Honorarium that pays you in perpetuity.

That is going to be the reality of the thing no matter how much you'd like it to be otherwise.

I respectfully suggest that you make use of your ample effervescence for positive, supportable efforts such as the project in your garage and leave the hyperbole for the professional marketing experts.

[Munter]

Back to moths for a second - while I don't sail one myself, I don't think there is anyone in the fleet who wouldn't like a boat that is easier to sail than their current one. Moths are driven by a desire to get around the race course as fast as possible and if there is any scope in improving the handling of the boats to make it easier to go fast I think it would be adopted quickly by the class. Race results are too much of an incentive for a snobbish attitude to handling traits to get much traction there...

[bistros]

Originally Posted by Munter

Back to moths for a second - while I don't sail one myself, I don't think there is anyone in the fleet who wouldn't like a boat that is easier to sail than their current one. Moths are driven by a desire to get around the race course as fast as possible and if there is any scope in improving the handling of the boats to make it easier to go fast I think it would be adopted quickly by the class. Race results are too much of an incentive for a snobbish attitude to handling traits to get much traction there...

How about asking them? There are lots of people who sail Moths available on Sailing Anarchy, and they have a neat little survey option when creating a thread..

Since you are posting conjecture and your opinion, I'll post mine: I don't think a lot of top Moth sailors feel their boat is too hard to sail. They actually go out of their way to promote it as easy to sail, posting videos of them doing circular foiling tacks and gybes, as well as videos of children foiling.

Moth sailors are NOT snobbish at all. They are friendly, willing to share, willing to take out new folks any time and more than willing to talk about things. Many have been turned off by the aggressive personal attacks and overblown hype present here, and refuse to participate.

I've never met a Moth sailor in person or on-line that I'd call snobbish.

[PI Design]

Now 470s are at it too:

Hey Pi-that picture is in "Icarus the boat that Flies". The boat was owned by Frenchman Claude Tisserande and he claimed an unofficial speed record of 20 knots. He is credited with improving the top speed ever achieved by a 470(up to 1975) by 5 knots. He used two surface piercing foils forward and a t-foil aft. There was also an FD that flew with the same configuration in about the same time frame ,if I remember correctly.
But the first monofoiler in history is probably Monitor ,a US Navy project with Baker Mfg. from 1950-56 in the USA. She was timed at 30.4 knots- a speed not yet equalled by the Moth(but it will be soon).