Fastest Sailboat on the Planet!

[RHough]

The ditch angle to the wind does matter. However, the wind speeds are high enough to overcome this. If a less efficient Kite can go 55.65 in 40, a more efficient boat can go faster using the same wind angle. This is just simple physics. Having more angle may not be optimum for a max speed run, but it does not stop the most efficient craft from coming out on top.

This is an ultimate speed record. Confining the angle sailed means sailing at less than the maximum speed potential. After you pass the speed of the true wind AWA (and drive) goes down if you sail higher or lower than optimum.

Start from 160 deg off the wind with a 1.4x wind speed kite. (56 in 40)
TWA 160, AWA 36.6, AWS 22.9
TWA 150, AWA 43.1, AWS 29.3 closer angle to true wind increases AWA (Drive vector larger) and AWS (more available power)
TWA 140, AWA 45.4, AWS 36.1
TWA 130, AWA 45.3, AWS 43.1 closer TWA decreases AWA and drive

Hold the angle at 140 and increase speed:
1.4xTWS AWA 45.4, AWS 36.1
1.5xTWS AWA 41.2, AWS 39.0 (Optimum AWA 41.8, AWS 44.6, TWA 132)
1.6xTWS AWA 37.6, AWS 42.1 (Optimum AWA 38.7, AWS 49.0, TWA 130)

This does not look like much, but sailing faster at the same angle is sailing slower than possible ... not what speed records are about.

Decreasing the AWA reduces drive and increases drag to counter larger lateral force vector. The drag goes up more than the increase in power from AWS at smaller AWA.

The point is that to reach the best speed you need to sail the course that provides AWA near maximum.

The trench is an artificial constraint. As multiples of wind speed increase the range of AWA decreases and the maximum AWA occurs at lower angles off the wind.

Point of interest:
Landsailers at 3.15x TWS
VS = 126
TWA = 109
AWA = 18.5
AWS = 119.1

I doubt that speeds will climb much in a fixed angle trench unless the current trench is 5 degrees or more off the optimum.

The fixed angle of the trench will become a limiting factor for the kites too.

The playing field should be level. Ditch the Trench!

The only reason a kite would not be faster than MI in the same water is that the wind was only 17 knots. Water reacts to wind speed. The course conditions change from smooth to rough as the wind increases. Building a course where the water does not get rough provides conditions that are not comparable.

Boston, I'll be happy to join you in asking for a review of the rules.

I'm not anti-kite. I'm pro fair play.

 

[RHough]

Weymouth Speed Week Results

These results show that the kites and sailboards are in the top 62 places in an event sailed in comparable conditions. I don't think the kiteboards have anything to worry about on an even playing field. Makes one wonder why they get so defensive about the ditch.

 

[Boston]

I appreciate that Hough
I think there are a number of people who would like to see some rational and reason involved in implementing the qualification that "conditions" be "comparable"

at present obviously some contestants are enjoying a significant advantage by running in an artificial ditch and this "artificial" advantage is the crux of the issue

for instance
an artificial berm that is directly enhancing the speed of some few contestants is in direct conflict with the rules

9. MEANS OF PROPULSION
A yacht shall sail by using only the wind and water to increase, maintain or decrease her speed

clearly these kiters are benefiting from an artificial berm which acts as a wind break for the riders thus externally enhancing there speed and also manipulates the wind as it flows over the artificial obstruction providing additional lift for the kite itself

the berm is an artificial/mechanical construct that is external to the craft which obviously directly contributes to the vehicles speed by virtue of its providing a protected area from the wind for some portion of the vehicle to travel in and by altering the wind dynamics in such a way as to provide greater wind speed and energy at the kite itself.




also the mechanical or passive wave cancellation devices external to the vehicles in question directly contributing to a certain class vehicles higher speeds is in direct conflict with the rules

9. MEANS OF PROPULSION
A yacht shall sail by using only the wind and water to increase, maintain or decrease her speed

obviously the smoother the water the faster these guys might go, so by artificially canceling the waves in the ditch they are directly enhancing the forward motion of a certain class of vessel through artificial means external to the vessel in question and in direct opposition to the rules as specified above. Also in direct opposition of the courses representing "similar conditions" such that contestants anywhere might fairly compete.



the use of a constructed course of a type or design specifically benefiting a particular type or class of vessels performance yet unavailable to similarly benefit other vehicle type or classes is in direct conflict with the rule regarding "similar conditions"

1. GENERAL
The purpose of these rules is to enable attempts to be made on Sailing Speed Records in any part of the world under comparable conditions. They do not form the conditions of any prize or trophy, nor are they sailing instructions.

it's obvious that a construct external to the sailing vehicle that is directly contributing to the vehicles forward motion is disallowed by the rules.

it seems equally as apparent that external mechanical systems specific to or that enhance any particular class vehicles speed is disallowed by the rules

9. MEANS OF PROPULSION
A yacht shall sail by using only the wind and water to increase, maintain or decrease her speed

so how is it anyone can justify a mechanical wave cancellation system that allows a vessel to go "faster" and that is external to the vehicle let alone not powered by the wind is beyond most rational thinking. I'm thinking this wave cancellation thing along with the berm/wind break is the most egregious breach of rule 9 in the 500 meter classification. Obviously the ditch itself fails to represent the "similar conditions" specified in rule 1 and as such I might add the following.


Clearly the rules require all "boats" to run in "similar" conditions and thus artificial conditions specifically or unintentionally designed to favor one class vessel over another fail to exemplify either the spirit or the letter of the rules as they are currently written

in a legal sense there is not only the letter of the law but also the spirit of the contract which one might breach just as easily as the letter of said contract, either might be considered unethical or illegal by the ruling body.

I would propose the following solutions to enable all contenders to enjoy the "similar conditions" specified in the existing rules.

I would suggest that the outright speed record be considered any timed course of a specific length and type conducive to similarly advantage all type of craft as defined by the ruling body. That said course be consistent and conducive in shape, form and conditions for all competing craft and that it be of some predetermined depth and distance from land masses so as not to favor one vehicle type over another. The emphasis being on "similar conditions" available to all and specific conditions being defined by the ruling body.

consider that artificial conditions mechanically or otherwise created for the sole purpose of benefiting ( whether deliberately or accidentally ) a specific class of vehicle should be disqualified from consideration as these artificial conditions unfairly handicap other contenders and fail to guarantee the "similar conditions" for all competitors as specified within the existing rules.

deal is that while some rather primitive and ambiguous rules may have allowed artificial conditions to temporarily benefit a certain class of vehicle, that this situation was never intended to exist, nor should it be allowed to continue to exist in regards to future records.



cheers
B

 

[Doug Lord]

Boston, I'm in as well-maybe some sort of petition? Let me know how you want to proceed.


Ditch the Trench!

 

[SteveMellet]

"The difference is that ALL speedsailors can use Weymouth, but ONLY kites and windsurfers can use the trench. How is this a moot point? If it "only" takes skill and development to get the speed, why did they build the trench? Why did they build a site where their main competition cannot sail at all? Can the kites hit the same speeds outside the trench?

The fact is that the trench is a factor or they would not use it.

No one is trying to outlaw sailing near shore to take advantage of smoother water. It is only the exclusive nature of the trench that I object to."
Except Doug & Boston, it would appear.

Look, the WSSRC ruled a minimum water depth, which got the kiters and windsurfers all upset, but did so to try and negate the "ground effect theory"
I agree with some here that the "similar conditions" should be enforced, I`d say no record attempts should take place in less than 35knots, and no more than 2ft of water. This is as logical an approach as the opposite view. In reality, that rule should be scrapped to allow diverse approaches to acchieve the goal. I`m equally amazed at both approaches for different reasons.

And it`s interesting to keep re-inforcing the fact that the kiter`s are not boats, and quote the WSSRC rule repeatedly, in which no mention of the word "boat" is made.

"1. GENERAL
The purpose of these rules is to enable attempts to be made on Sailing Speed Records in any part of the world under comparable conditions. They do not form the conditions of any prize or trophy, nor are they sailing instructions. "

Oh sorry, I`ve just seen the reference myself now. I guess it depends on how hard you are looking to see something that really isn`t there.

 

[Blue Leader]

Its time that Boston, Doug and crew leave the ivory towers and get your feet wet! You have no actual experience in the topic of discussion. Go change the rules....quick before the kiters break 60kts next year.........its your only hope!. All your talk about how superior Hydroptere is.......ahhhhhhh!

The"elistist" exclusive kiters would enjoy having you all come to Luderitz with your big boats next year. You can race offshore or in the Trench. I cant wait to see your faces when the green flag is raised and its your turn to make a run in the 40 to 50 kts of the 2nd Lagoon.

good luck with your rule changes and regulations!

 

[Doug Lord]

"And it`s interesting to keep re-inforcing the fact that the kiter`s are not boats, and quote the WSSRC rule repeatedly, in which no mention of the word "boat" is made.

.

===================
Well, its clear to me that the kiteboards are not "boats" as it should be to anybody. And that means the Hydroptere is still the fastest sailboat in the world over 500m and over the nautical mile. Thanks for helping me out, Steve.


Ditch the Trench!

 

[RHough]

I agree with some here that the "similar conditions" should be enforced,

Not Similar ... Comparable

All the records set in trenches are comparable

All the records set in open water are comparable

The trench and open water are not comparable

The people that are defending the kiteboard records set in the trench say that the kiteboards would be faster anyway. If that is true, why do they dig and groom the trench?

They say that with a larger area for run-up the kites would be faster. Why don't they sail in a more open area where they have that room?

If they don't need the trench, why do they add risk to the record runs?

NASSP's own blog says:

With winds in excess of 45 knots and sand storms and sea spray all around, Rob entered The Trench. Riding his 9m Switchblade and speed board of choice, wearing his helmet and all additional padding and protection, Rob sailed down the Ludertiz Trench into a very questionable finishing area (completely closed and close to rocks and sand banks). He has once again sailed into the annals of sailing history…World Record Speed of 55.65 knots !

It looks like the trench is so important that they use a limited run-up area and sail in a narrow trench into a hazardous finish area. None of these are problems in open water.

So which is it, Kiteboards are the fastest and don't need the trench to be the fastest, or is it that they need the trench to set records and take extra risks to use the trench?

When the next generation of kiteboards up the average and need to sail at higher angles will they dig a new trench at the new angles?

Ditch the Trench

 

[Boston]

I'll keep you posted

there are a number of reasonable arguments to both allow the kites to compete ( which I wholeheartedly think they should be allowed to do ) and to not allow the ditch ( or any other artificial constructed venue designed and optimized to a specific class of vessel or utilizing artificial means to extraneously enhance vehicle speed ) as a venue

whats interesting is that Folding Cards thinks it takes a slew of dollars to write a reasonable legal argument. Something tells me that this ditch thing is on thin ice anyway. ( sounds like they were forced to remove the fence ) The overall speed record rules in the 500 meter class clearly specify "similar conditions" and obviously that is not what the ditch provides. Furthermore it's various elements are specifically in opposition to rules 7 and 9 by its external use of both passive and mechanical speed enhancing mechanisms.

obviously no one has presented a serious legal challenge to the ditch if its still being considered a viable venue when it so obviously has these contrived characteristics that serve to enhance speed outside of the vessel itself

doesn't mean that my argument will stand, but someones will eventually. Having given it even this cursory review ( the whole subject deserves a detailed study ) and having read and listened to all sides ( even the rude ones ) even to my limited legal background its apparent there is something very fishy about the ditch riders adherence to the rules. Little issue of the spirit of the law comes to mind as well as several literal infractions. For instance.

the berm is on shaky ground once you realize that its a extraneous construct intentionally or unintentionally deflecting wind off the riders and into the kite thus contributing to the overall forward motion of the vehicles involved which is in direct opposition to the rules as presently written

the wave cancellation system is directly contributing to lowering the resistance of the vehicles and it being an external device disqualifies its use to enhance speed under the present rules

there is also the qualification that venues represent "similar conditions" which this venue clearly does not.

my guess is that the commission is flooded with these arguments and nothing I say will strike them as being all that new however, petitioning the commission with viable concerns might make them realize that additional eyes are watching and a failure to recognize these discrepancies could have future ramifications on what up to now has been a thriving sport.

The emphasis needs be on maintaining a playing field conducive to all comers which at present is in serious jeopardy

Its critical that the stipulation of "similar conditions" be honored lest one small faction be allowed to subvert what is otherwise one of the last great races in sports

cheers
B

 

[Boston]

Its time that Boston, Doug and crew leave the ivory towers and get your feet wet! You have no actual experience in the topic of discussion. Go change the rules....quick before the kiters break 60kts next year.........its your only hope!. All your talk about how superior Hydroptere is.......ahhhhhhh!

unfortunately you have missed the whole jist of the conversation

The"elistist" exclusive kiters would enjoy having you all come to Luderitz with your big boats next year. You can race offshore or in the Trench. I cant wait to see your faces when the green flag is raised and its your turn to make a run in the 40 to 50 kts of the 2nd Lagoon.

ok apparently you have also not understood the nature of the arguments against this venue, please go back a few pages and read up on the issues involved before you misrepresent the issues like this again

good luck with your rule changes and regulations!

actually I'm not suggesting we change the rules, just that we define and enforce the ones we have. Your missing the entire point if you think this is about disallowing kites, its not. Its specifically about a level playing field. The rules deliberately and clearly stipulate "comparable conditions" in the very first sentence

1. GENERAL
The purpose of these rules is to enable attempts to be made on Sailing Speed Records in any part of the world under comparable conditions. They do not form the conditions of any prize or trophy, nor are they sailing instructions.

seems like a lot of people have asked you that if the ditch is so irrelevant to your achievements then why not go into the same conditions everyone else races in and prove your still the fastest

seems pretty clear that on open water over the mile course the kites don't stand a chance ( 30% slower )

so whats the deal with this ditch that it enhances your speeds so much and how is external speed enhancing mechanisms legal under the "present" rules

sorry we seem to be off on a wrong foot here but your simply ignoring a perfectly reasonable argument and instead it kinda looks like your cheating and its just a mater of time before the ruling body gets around to straightening the whole thing out

best of luck but how about if we all run a race on the same track and no, not one specifically designed to favor a particular player

cheers as always
B

 

[RHough]

===================
Well, its clear to me that the kiteboards are not "boats" as it should be to anybody. And that means the Hydroptere is still the fastest sailboat in the world over 500m and over the nautical mile. Thanks for helping me out, Steve.

I don't have a problem with the "boat" thing. You don't help the fairness effort by coming back to this. If it makes you feel better, fine. The fastest "boat" at Weymouth was 63rd fastest. Wymouth is sailed in open water. At this point in time Kiteboards and Sailbaords are faster in many conditions than "boats". That fact is not arguable.

It is like setting a record with a steam locomotive then refusing to acknowledge that diesels are faster. Then after a mag-lev train goes faster yet claiming that your beloved steam loco is still the fastest train.

All that is in question here is Comparable Conditions. Given water that Kiteboards, Sailboards, and Boats can sail in the boats are slower, but they have an equal chance. They do not have an equal chance as long as the trenches are in use.

Just as there are separate records for powered system sailing, there should be separate records for artificial courses. Riding your bike behind a wind brake vehicle is a motor pacing record. Riding your bike without outside assistance is a separate record. No one even attempts to make a logical argument that the two are "comparable".

I don't know (or care) if Hydroptre's 500M speed has been beaten by a kiteboard in open water. I suspect that a 55+ knot trenchboard is very close in speed to Hydroptre in the same water. IMO the quest for 50 knots was much more interesting when conditions were comparable. As soon as the trench was built to gain advantage, the David and Goliath aspect of the sailing speed record was lost.

 

[P Flados]

With the exception of the one megabuck project that produced a spectacular huge foiled trimaran, all recent outright record holders and real contenders have run in conditions that sheltered them from rough water.

If you want distance from shore, you are getting into territory where the rich and the well sponsored will have a huge advantage. Sounds kind of like the AC we all love and admire so much.

No one has explained to me how Walvis Bay or Sandy Point are truly different than Luderitz. Sailing just off shore is the only way most "average Joe" speed sailing boats will ever have a chance. If a course is along a natural shore line, or if it is off the shore line of a shipping canal or if it is along a rock jetty, or if it is off of a natural shore line that has been improved is all up to the competitors by the current rules. Please do not propose rules that prevent me from using most of the current sheltered 500 meter strips in my area because they are not natural. Also, there are a few areas where the shore is currently natural, but the water at low tide is probably of insufficient depth. Digging out a course would also get tripped up if only natural settings were allowed.

The anti-trench crowd say that Luderitz is an exclusive advantage one group, but they miss that trenching is well established method open to anyone anywhere. For heaven's sake, look at all of the records set at "Saintes Maries de la Mer Speed Canal, known to windsurfers as The Canal, is a man-made trench near the French Mediterranean coastal town Saintes Maries de la Mer, built especially for speed record breaking sailing by windsurfers" (wikipedia). Although it was built by one group, I am pretty sure it is open to anyone that can use it to their advantage (such as Longshot did).

The guys at Luderitz could probably achieve identical or better results if they contracted a dredging company to come in and just square off the shore line at the desired angle with a steep taper for water depth such that anyone could run at this location. As long as they ran close to the shore (Like MI at Sandy Point), the water would be plenty smooth. It would improve safety, tides would be a non-issue, and logistics would be improved. They would probably like the results better. For now, they have not seen the need for the additional cost given that trenching is an established acceptable practice that complies with the rules as written. This makes the actual "trenching" NOT CHEATING by definition.

Actually a long smoothly curving shore line similar to Sandy Point but with less curvature would be ideal for everyone as moving along the course would allow for optimum wind angles. However, wishing for an ideal course does not make it happen. The physical limitations of any given location are what they are as are the costs of trying to make improvements.

If anyone thinks that this layout would have stopped them from beating the Hydroptere record, please provide sufficient technical justification for your position.

I do not like the berm more because it give whiners ammunitions than because of any real impact. With the wind angles involved, it might have reduced the apparent wind speed at the riders by a few of knots. It also generates turbulence and potentially messes with airflow at the kite. If I had dug the trench, I would have likely piled the dirt on the windward side more from a desire to keep the lee side smooth and less risky for a kiter that looses it & gets dragged downwind. I probably would not have thought about any wind screening functions. However, now that wind screening is mentioned, I do not like berms, fences etc when you consider that someone could indeed engineer structures to both shield a boat while improving airspeed at a sail/wing/kite. As such, I would recommend to the Kiters, that next year they smooth the dirt on the windward side to more closely resembles a typical shoreline. If they want to uses fences etc. for the acceleration lane, they should be careful that such structures do not result in speeds faster at the entry point than their average speeds (not much chance of this). They should also careful consider the need for better end of run provisions for the general safety of the competitors. More width & depth would be to their advantage, but the extra costs/effort must be considered.

These would all be enhancements. If anyone thinks that duplicating the effect of running close to a smooth shore line would slow them down, I would attribute this position more to wishful thinking rather than careful open minded analysis.

 

[RHough]

With the exception of the one megabuck project that produced a spectacular huge foiled trimaran, all recent outright record holders and real contenders have run in conditions that sheltered them from rough water.

No argument from me.

If you want distance from shore, you are getting into territory where the rich and the well sponsored will have a huge advantage. Sounds kind of like the AC we all love and admire so much.

Not distance from shore, just comparable conditions.

No one has explained to me how Walvis Bay or Sandy Point are truly different than Luderitz. Sailing just off shore is the only way most "average Joe" speed sailing boats would ever have a chance. If the just offshore run is along a natural shore line, or if it is off a shore line of a shipping canal or if it is along a rock jetty, or if it is off of a natural shore line that has been improved is all up to the competitors.

If the water surface in a man made trench is smoother than the water surface in equal depth off the beach comparable conditions do not exist.

The anti-trench crowd say that Luderitz is an exclusive advantage one group, but they miss that trenching is well established method open to anyone anywhere. For heaven's sake, look at all of the records set at "Saintes Maries de la Mer Speed Canal, known to windsurfers as The Canal, is a man-made trench near the French Mediterranean coastal town Saintes Maries de la Mer, built especially for speed record breaking sailing by windsurfers" (wikipedia). Although it was built by one group, I am pretty sure it is open to anyone that can use it to their advantage (such as Longshot did).

Fine, compare trench speeds to trench speeds. Do not compare trench speeds to open water speeds.

The guys at Luderitz could probably achieve identical or better results if they contracted a dredging company to come in and just square of the shore line & increase the depth such that anyone could run at this location. As long as they stayed close to the shore (Like MI at Sandy Point), the water would be plenty smooth. It would improve safety, tides would be non-issues, and logistics would be improved. They would probably like the results better. For now, they have not seen the need for the additional cost given that trenching is an established acceptable practice that complies with the rules as written. This makes the actual "trenching" NOT CHEATING by definition.

The records were not set in comparable conditions. This would seem to violate the rule that requires records be set in comparable conditions. ie. the French Trench records compared to the Luderitz Trench. Not Trench compared to open water.

If anyone thinks that this layout would have stopped them from beating the Hydroptere record, please provide sufficient technical justification for your position.

I agree, kiteboards and sailboards have shown that they are faster in comparable conditions. This is not about defending or protecting Hydroptre. This is about the comparable conditions requirement of the rules.

I do not like the berm more because it give whiners ammunitions than because of any real impact. With the wind angles involved, it might have reduced the apparent wind speed at the riders by a few of knots. It also generates turbulence and potentially messes with airflow at the kite. If I had dug the trench, I would have likely piled the dirt on the windward side more from a desire to keep the lee side smooth and less risky for a kiter that looses it & gets dragged downwind. I probably would not have thought about any wind screening functions. However, now that wind screening is mentioned, I do not like berms, fences etc when you consider that someone could indeed engineer structures to both shield a boat while improving airspeed at a sail/wing/kite. As such, I would recommend to the Kiters, that next year they smooth the dirt on the windward side to more closely resembles a typical shoreline. If they want to uses fences etc. for the acceleration lane, they should be careful that such structures do not result in speeds faster at the entry point than their average speeds (not much chance of this). They should also careful consider the need for better end of run provisions for the general safety of the competitors. More width & depth would be to their advantage, but the extra costs/effort must be considered.

These would all be enhancements. If anyone thinks that duplicating the effect of running close to a smooth straight shore line would slow them down, I would attribute this position more to wishful thinking rather than careful open minded analysis.

If running close to a smooth straight shoreline would NOT slow them down, why did they dig the trench?

I'm not whining. I'm pointing out the obvious. They sure didn't build the trench to go slower.

 

[P Flados]

Fine, compare trench speeds to trench speeds. Do not compare trench speeds to open water speeds.

and

If running close to a smooth straight shoreline would NOT slow them down, why did they dig the trench?

I'm not whining. I'm pointing out the obvious. They sure didn't build the trench to go slower.

No argument as far as comparing trench speeds. This what all but one outright record has been since 1988. All along I have been just trying to say that going for the Outright record can be done in either setting. I will be the first to point out that Hydroptere is still the worlds fastest sailboat. If Longshot had made it to Luderitz and done better, Hydroptere could still claim an open water title for all it would be worth.

My recollection of what I read as it was happening is that the trench was more for getting the decent water, the required depth and a straight run at a good angle. This was not available without either the trench and/or fence with dredging. They were kind of reluctant to trench at first as they were not sure it would be safe to go 70 mph down a narrow strip with dirt on both sides. The "not safe" is actually an issue that I feel they have not adequately addressed at this point. Since the rules allow trenching (quick and relatively cheap) or adjusting the entire shore line (not so quick and much more expensive), or fixing the depth at the fence (multiple reasons not to) they did the obvious.

 

[Blue Leader]

Hey liberals.........The trench that was dug was straight......the shore line in luderitz is NOT straight. Again for the 10th time Kiters need to sail a straight line cause we cant use GPS like hydroptere. Sand piled upwind causes air turbulance and a downward pressure on the water which creates chop.......both are not good for speed. This will be fixed next year resulting in more speed.......oh oh there goes 60 kts.......while you guys will be busy with the lawyers and petitions....hurry! Again, you dont know because your on the 3rd floor of your ivory towers while the actual world record sailors are on the water pushing the limits and backing up their words with action........not pushing keys on a key board. Cattelan sailed a 53kt 500 in natural conditions! It's your job to prove that wrong! Maybe a new WSSRC rule should state that in order for someone to talk about new rules and regs, that someone needs to have Been clocked over 20kts over the 500 meters. Good luck boys!!!!! I'm having a blast teaching Boston Doug and crew about the real world of speed sailing......where do we send the bill. This is getting expensive!!