Evolvement of foiling sailboats over the last 70 years

Where did I attack him? I said that the comparison to an ORMA was not very relevant. Considering what Doug has done on this forum and others, that was nothing like an attack.

It should also be noted that in posts 89 and 101, which appears to be what is upsetting Doug, I specifically referred to SMALL cats on several occasions. When someone makes it so clear that they are referring to small cats, it is dishonest to imply that they were referring to large multis.

 

I apologise, you are quite right.

Going back to the original question of this thread, roughly: is it foils themselves or other/complimentary technologies that has resulted in the "revolution" in foiling that we are seeing at the moment?

I would posit that the use of horizontal foils on boats that are not intended to fly is a reasonably novel step in boat design. I speak of things like DSS, semi-lifting C-foils on multis etc. Are there examples of foils being used for partial lift or increased righting moment from decades ago? I guess that the Bruce foil (of 1960s vintage) would fall into this category.

 

=====================================
Data derived from overall performance in a long ocean race are not necessarily reflective of the actual speed differences of the two boats when sailing in the same wind, from the same direction and on the same point of sail.
I think my figures below are much more accurate.

=======================================

 

========================================
tlouth7, what I was trying to point out is that the "large data set of boats of this type" was not reflective of all "foiling vessels available to average sailors" but only to small catamarans that don't foil upwind. The SCHRS data is not reflective of any small foilers other than this group.
Moths, foiling kiteboards ,foiling windsurfers, the UFO, the new Phantom Ultimate, the F101, and others don't fit into the SCHRS data.
The SCHRS data may have been intended to just represent small catamarans but it has been used(possibly misunderstood?) by TLF and you to encompass a much larger group of foilers.
I appreciate you taking a look at this and thanks for your efforts to keep the peace!

Great article: https://www.sailmagazine.com/multihulls/foiling-is-becoming-a-sailing-style-for-all

 

Once again--UPDATED:
============================
Foils are certainly not "impractical" in most applications nor are they "experimental" in most applications.
Be wary of "facts" that limit speed increases of full flying foilers to just 4%-see below. There probably wouldn't be an ongoing foiler revolution if speed increases were so small. But DSS equipped monohulls(designed from scratch as DSS) gain more than 4% in most conditions.
Many original "foiling" cats can only foil downwind but that is changing.
The Moth can foil upwind and downwind . The worlds first foiling keelboat the Quant 23 can foil upwind and downwind-upwind in 8 knots of wind -downwind in 5 knots of breeze.
The new Flying Phantom Ultimate Foiler Cat was projected to fly upwind in 8 knots of wind.

Here is a slightly dated article you might find interesting:
1) What will foiling do for you? – Yachting World https://www.yachtingworld.com/features/what-will-foiling-do-for-you-70244
-------------------
2) Also a simplistic look at the Moth and foiling by CNN:

-------------------
3) https://www.sailmagazine.com/boats/foiling-monohull-design
---2017 article predicts Beneteau Figaro 3 will reduce displacement by 900lb and increase speed by 15%
---Says new IMOCA foils are expected to boost performance margins by up to 10%
-------------------
4) Farr Introduces Infiniti 53 https://www.sailingworld.com/farr-introduces-infiniti-53
quote from article:
Britton Ward, vice president and senior naval architect at Farr Yacht Design, says that initial performance estimates show that fitting a DSS foil, particularly at reaching angles, can provide a performance increase on the order of 15 to 20 percent and at reduced heel angles.
------------------
5) Why Beneteau’s new foil-assisted Figaro 3 is big news for sailing - Yachting World https://www.yachtingworld.com/yachts-and-gear/why-beneteau-new-foil-assisted-figaro-3-big-news-for-sailing-102174
-----
Keep in mind that DSS is "foil assist" and an equally well designed full foiling boat would be substantially faster than a foil assist boat.

 

This pretty much sums up the misunderstanding for me, Doug tests and is interested in foiling performance specifically, when a boat isn't foiling it isn't particularly relevant to him except for why. For me and I presume most others here considering or contemplating applying foiling principles to a boat in everyday use , when a craft isn't foiling is very relevant, because of the cost, extra complexity in engineering out weak points, greatly increased risk/safety factors/ stability and effort it takes to build and maintain the system. It becomes a boat with likely extra drag and appendages. The advantage needs to be fairly significant when weighed against these factors I think.
When I stated to Doug that in my opinion it wasn't worth the effort for my purposes/ not evolved enough, and explained why,his tactics ,or genuine issue was that it simply did not compute for him. he could not understand what I was talking about. After a very frustrating and drawn out exchange for us both he posted this..

But not to me. POP! went my mind, he doggedly avoided any such acknowledgement with me ,yet it was what we were so plainly obviously, tiresomely and nauseatingly discussing, to me ; anything but for him..one sick puppy? I would caution anyone who has a point of difference with Doug, 15,000 posts shows he absolutely" loves" foiling don't mess with it. That sort of doggedness sometimes leads to new discoveries, enter at own risk, I've spent too much time on this.

 

Given that the two boats were separated by less than 40 minutes for the duration of an ocean race over a relatively small course where they navigated around geographic features and were on the same point of sail for each leg (more–or–less), the results are a good indication of overall performance for that particular event.

Figures for which you have provided no source. If that was sustained over the race, Maserati would have won by three or four times the margin it did.

That a boat can achieve higher speeds on a particular point of sail is fine, but when applied to sailing in general, boats have to be able to perform in a range of conditions and angles. Comanche is undoubtably faster than Wild Oats XI in certain conditions, but the results in the Sydney to Hobart show that their overall performance in a range of conditions is remarkably similar, and that Wild Oats XI is very much faster in its favoured conditions.

Wild Oats XI has also shown that lifting foils aren't for everyone, having tried a DSS–type foil for a few seasons before removing it. Other maxis have also tried lifting foils, but as yet they haven't shown anything like the performance boost of other features like a canting keel, or wider planing hulls.

And that analysis only considers performance. There are other factors at play, such as initial cost and ongoing maintenance that are major contributors to practicality that should also be considered.

 

Maserati wins line honors! And thanks to the generosity of Giovanni Soldini and his exceptional sportsmanship a new class was created specifically for this race allowing Argo to win on handicap!
And it is very interesting that those in the MOCRA Class that voted against helping Argo have been truly whupped!!!

 

MOCRA isn't a class, it's a rating rule that can be used for handicap results.

Perhaps you miss the irony in crowing about a foil–assist boat beating a full foiling boat over a passage race when you:

1. Consistently refute evidence that for multihulls, full–foilers are only marginally faster than other types (and in this case, slower)
2. Claim ocean racing results over long distances aren't a good indicator of performance

PS.
It's not good etiquette to post essentially the same content in 3 different threads in a short period of time.

 

Yep, as Fred says and any reasonable person knows, looking at performance in a limited set of conditions and then extrapolating that as if it was going to be sustained across all conditions is just cherry picking. I passed the world's fastest C foiling A Class cat going upwind in my Laser last race and caught it twice on our old F18 the weekend before, but I wouldn't draw conclusions from that.

It's interesting looking at some of the stuff Doug posts. For example, here's what the Sail magazine article says about the issues of foilers;

"The latest IMOCA 60s may be faster than their predecessors when reaching and running in moderate to strong conditions, but they cannot point as high and are draggier in light conditions when boatspeeds aren’t high enough for their foils to become effective. Only in a race like the Vendée Globe, which features lots of breeze and little windward work, could boats like these be cutting-edge competitive."

The article also points out the enormous cost of these foils - "Like the exotic Dali foils on the IMOCA boats, these new Figaro foils are expensive, complex structures. The deeply curved foils and the cases supporting them, according to Beneteau’s sailboat marketing director, Gianguido Girotti, will represent almost a third of the cost of the boat."

"Just one set of IMOCA Dali foils costs something like $400,000, and teams can expect to build multiple sets as they fine-tune designs. Even on much smaller boats, as on the Figaro 3, exotic deeply curved foils can cost more than the sails and rig."

That puts a very different complexion on the practicality aspect. The figures given by the article mean that the cost of the foils+ structure in the 10m Figaro is $70,000 - an enormous cost. Even if they do add 15% of speed across the board, the cost/benefit analysis looks poor since the costs increase by about 33%.

The Infiniti 53 doesn't appear to have been built. It's not on the Infiniti website, it's not listed in the results section of the Farr website, and there appear to be no photos. The agent's website refers to it still in the future tense. A boat that does not appear to exist does not prove the performance of anything.

I can't find anything that indicates that more than one Infiniti 46 has been built. It has done very well in some races. When it did the RORC season last, it was also beaten by the two older fixed-keel Ker 46s over the line in Cowes-Dinard and was only half an hour ahead of the Ker 46 over the line and well behind on IRC in the Fastnet. The other races it did seemed to have no similar-sized racers to compare to.

The Infiniti 46 DSS canter then did the Bermuda race, where after almost four days (97 hours) of racing it was only 34 minutes ahead of the first fixed keel Carkeek 47, 60 minutes ahead of the other Carkeek 47, and 50+ minutes ahead of the fixed keel Kernan 47. The fixed keel Ker 43 Christopher Dragon was less than three hours behind - a good performance for a significantly shorter boat.

So, when up against similar-sized fixed keel racing machines the Infiniti 46 is often not showing vastly greater speed - about one percent seems to be a rough average. That's not a real breakthrough considering it's a canter as well as having DSS, and is 700kg lighter than IRC rule types like the Carkeek.

Incidentally, since someone requested information on results on any foilers and any handicap system one may as well note that the DSS boat appears to have finished about 149th on corrected time out of 168 finishers.

When looking for info about the Infiniti 46 I noted that Hugh Welbourne referred to IMOCA foilers as having "some undesirable characteristics which they have certainly discovered by now!" I wonder what these problems are?

 

It's kind of like yelling, or just saying the same thing over and over again (like a well known politician) in a futile attempt to convince people you're right.
Agreed, poor etiquette indeed.

 

======================
There are exceptions to every rule. The results were very relevant to the subject of each thread.

 

=============================
I wanted to find out the top speed for each boat in a given set of conditions which is possible using the tracker. Much more relevant and accurate for what I was trying to find than overall results in an ocean race.

 

You've now posted the same material on 4 different threads, three of which you started. One of those is specifically about the race.

Consider instead posting it once in the most relevant thread and referencing it from others (without the large, red, bolded text).

You have also reposted your claims regarding upwind/downwind performance 3 or 4 times on this thread alone by quoting yourself. Repetition ad nauseam doesn't add weight or provenance to a claim, nor is it a sensible way to conduct a discussion.

 

Gee, the carbon 40 ft moustache foiler which had a mediocre series at St Tropez is having a shocker in the Caribbean 600, according to the tracker - over 100 miles behind the leading fixed-keel Class 40 and a bunch of other C40s! She's lighter than the C40s are allowed to be, too.

The foiling D4 had a disappointing race, considering the excellence of some of her crew. The non-foiling Bieker was a whacking 6 hours ahead in a two day race, a huge margin considering their size difference.

Another interesting thing is looking at the MOCRA rule, and seeing its penalty for full foiling - 4%. So the main offshore multi rule reckons full foilers are 4% faster, and the main beach cat rules reckons the full foilers are about 4% faster. Gee, I wonder how much faster full foiling multis are?