Canting Keel Monos vs Multihulls

Facts/

Mr. Thompson- I'm satisfied to rely on Rohans word and Phil Stevensons word as opposed to you and Mr. Babbage. And the A-class site especially before it was damaged. At some point, it will all come out and the facts will be much clearer. Rohan Veal is in a MUCH better position than anyone who has ever posted on this forum to know the facts.
But again the key point is that the Moth bi-foil technology is NOT limited to the Moth and the potential of it's application to larger boats with canting technology and other forms of movable ballast is just tremendous. The monohull will ,quite possibly, get new legs. The foiler Moth has added 20% or so to Moth speed and that is very interesting since, according to Sail magazine, September issue, the Volvo Open 70 has a top speed just 5 knots slower than a G-Class cat. Let's see: 1.2 X40.6=48.72 knots. G-Class Cat=45 knots. Just a matter of time....
And certainly worth some serious technical development.

 

I have NOT cast aspersions on the honesty of Veal or Stevo so their word is NOT in doubt.

I know Phil and respect him greatly. All I was pointing out is that there is a considerable chance that the Tornado that he paced was a very, very slow Tornado and that it was a gusty day. It's not a case of not believing him.

It's exactly the same as pointing out that the regatta when Rohan came up to Sydney for the BM and got beaten badly was a very gusty weekend when his skill and the potential of the foiler were hidden by terrible conditions and a defective borrowed boat. IF we look at the conditions and the standard of a particular boat when a foiler gets beaten, we must also look at the conditions and the standard of a particular boat when a Tornado gets beaten.

The foiler may have paced a Tornado, but it was in very similar conditions to those prevailing when a conventional Moth, Cherubs and other slower boats were FASTER than the foiling world champ. Neither day was suitable for drawing conclusions. We don't trumpet wide and loud how foiler Moths were beaten by NS14s and Cherubs (and OKs and Sabres in light winds) without explaining that it was freak conditions and that foilers are normally super quick. The cats deserve the same respect.

EDIT - This is the point. You repeatedly point to times when foilers allegedly beat As etc. I am NOT saying this did not happen. All I am saying is that there may have been other factors involved (as detailed above) and the fact that we can get no details on the events you speak of means that we cannot find out whether the conditions were freakish, whether the As were slow, whether they were match racing each other, etc. You write of "other sources to back them up" but won't tell us what they are.

The "foiler pacing Tornado" line may well have been misleading in some ways, because many of the Tornadoes that day were going dog slow. Fair debate means giving people a chance to work out whether the same potentially misleading factors applied in those races you refer to where As were beaten by Moths.

I am NOT saying it did not happen, merely saying that it is pushing it to repeatedly quote something you know no details about. Because I am NOT saying Rohan was lying, you have no reason to bring up whether you would choose to listen to one world champ and foiling champ or another. The fact that you did so seems to indicate that you have chosen to think some people are lying.

END EDIT.

I am getting extremely sick of your slurs about the integrity of those who disagree with you. The only possible reason I can see for you to doubt Scott's word is that he disagrees with you. Scott is a world champ, a Moth champ, and a foiling champ. You are none of those things. He knows more about them than you do. If he disagrees with you about foiler Moths, YOU are almost certainly wrong.

I have been at pains to point out the superb performance of foilers as demonstrated (ie v world-class 49ers and Int 14s at Sail Melbourne). That is why I entered this thread. That is honesty. Slurring the integrity of those who ask you for facts to back up claims you have made is not.

I respond to your posts not to convince you, but to point out things to others on this forum. It's not worth being fouled by your bully-boy accusations of dishonesty. No further corresondence will be entered into.

Jeezers, and to think I got into this thread DEFENDING the speed of foilers.....

 

facts

Mr. Thompson, I did NOT slur you or Mr. Babbage I merely said if what either of you say is in conflict with what Phil Stevenson or Rohan says I will believe them- particularly when there are other sources that back them up and not either of you. There is no one on the planet more knowledgeable about the comparative performance of the foiler Moth than Rohan-thats just a fact.
----------------------------
Accusing me of slurring those that disagree with me -and you and Babbage in particular- is just BS particularly in the above context and I resent your personal invective in saying that I did!!
----------------------------
I've never sailed a Moth foiler but I have studied it and learned a lot about it thanks to Rohan and John Ilett. Further, I have designed built, sailed and foiled my own two foil monofoiler. Mr. Thompson, have you foiled a Moth yet? Or any monofoiler?
Other than my own work I have to rely on others more knowledgeable than I to know what's going on with foiling outside the US. I try very, very hard to get good info and have been lucky to have learned a lot from people directly involved in Moth foiling since the very begining. Again, if they tell me something I will believe it because I believe in their personal integrity and
know their level of experience well. Conflicts with what they say are simply just discarded....
You keep ignoring the subject of this thread, why is that? There is extraordinary work being done by a lot of people in furthering foiling technology-be sure to see the Foiling 18 thread- as of tonight the largest sailboat to have successfully flown on just two foils! Gee, I think it was Phil who said only Moths would foil on just two foils. We all have underestimated the dramatic leaps possible with this technology and the combination of bi-foil hydrofoils with canting/movable ballast is just too important to ignore.You're an intelligent guy; please try to contribute to the discussion and take your personal attacks elsewhere....

 

Question

Has Eric Sponberg sailed a bi-foiler yet? For that matter, has he sailed any foiler at all?

You post this drivel as if this "having sailed one" nonsense is the entry point for credibility. So, as long as you are spouting credibility, let us know of Eric's cred in the matter, or for that matter... Eric can let us know himself.

If he hasn't sailed a foiler, what makes his expertise so specific as to being able to dose out the process on anything other than a hypothetical, technical level?

This is being said in order to douse the flame of your silliness on this , "Have you ever sailed a bi-foiler?" ridiculousness. For that matter, do you have any proofs other than your bloated word, that your boat actually got it up? Stills... video... anything substantive?

It would seem that if neither you nor Eric have ever sailed a foiler in this fashion, that by your own demands regarding this fictitious line in the sand, as it were, you have both failed your own test on the matter.

So what is it? Do you have these proofs or don't you? Personally, I'd like to see the video clip of both you and Eric foiling a boat to establish your cred on the issue. If you can't produce either one, why should we believe a thing you say on the matter?

Your word then becomes as good as a computer nerd's who has never gone near the water. Put it up Doug, or wear the title you deserve.

 

Mr. high tech can't post pictures or video, because he uses web-tv to connect to the internet. Yep thats right web tv.

 

foiler tech

Eric has never sailed a monofoiler, however, he is one of the most experienced naval architects and marine engineers in the world and a recognized expert in the application of composites to sailboat design and construction. He is a worldwide recognized expert on the design and engineering of unstayed composite masts.His engineering expertise in the design and development of the aeroSKIFF14 is unmatched.
I have sailed and foiled my own experimental design as well as having designed and built it-in fact it was conceived of and designed before the first two-foil monofoiler ever flew.I have sailed and foiled a 16' Rave multifoiler and worked with Dr. Sam Bradfield on the successful development of his RC Skat test model using one of my RC trimarans. SEE www.monofoiler.com Unfortunately, there is no video of the boat on foils. I have about 200 hours sailing the worlds first production RC sailing hydrofoil (that I designed) -the F3 and there IS video(and stills) at: www.microsail.com
I asked Mr. Thompson if he'd ever sailed a monofoiler of any type-he didn't answer but his word would be good enough for me. That mine isn't for you is just plain pitifull...(and of no matter).
There is no question that I don't have a lot of fullsize monofoiler sailing experience(yet) when compared to the pioneers of the technology. But when John Ilett started 7 years ago he had none at all-same with Rohan- same with all the foiling pioneers.When Simon Maguire began the M4 project two years ago he had very little foiling experience-and is now the leading candidate to produce a Peoples Foiler. NOBODY has more than 7 years sailing a bi-foil monofoiler!
What we do have that they didn't is years of study of their development successes and failures-a huge backlog of foiling development information as well as the results of hundreds of hours of model testing and refinement. We're not trying to reinvent the wheel; we're refining a technology that has been developed over the last seven years into one of the most important design revolutions ever to hit sailing.
And that's where you and Mr. Thompson come up so short: you seem unable to focus on the issues brought up in the first post of this thread; you seem completely unable to intelligently discuss the issues raised by the question to Mr. K and his answer.Why is that?

 

Since when dose this thread have anything to do with hydrofoilers anyway? I thought it was about canting keelers and multihulls, and it was once interesting!

 

Future of Canting Ballast Technology"

Since about this post(#12 below), Joe. I tried to broaden the discussion by offering one answer to the question asked of Juan K in the Sail article. Foils are inextricably intertwined with the "future of canting ballast technology" which I feel will someday result in canting keel monohulls at least as fast as current non-foiled multihulls their own length.

 

Lets build a small prototype then!

Doug, if you can divert some of your food money for a month or two towards resin and fibreglass and maybe some thin exterior ply you could build an inexpensive small prototype foiler incorporating the accumulation of all your research and testing over quite a lot of years. Lets try for an 8 ft. Aeroskiff then, and use a small light kid to pilot it. After all if it is going to be a "Peoples Foiler" then 10 minutes instruction from you should give the kid pilot enough information to fly it first time around. Make sure you take some video to prove to us doubters that have can do what you say you very capable of.
Lets see---- One sheet of ply $40
Half gallon of resin $40
6 yards of light fibreglass $42
Wood flour $5
Incidentals $30
You have endless rigs and foils I believe.
Total cost of prototype ready to sail. Around $157 and an icecream for the kid.

 

Joe, sorry to inform you that any threads that Doug enters into becomes hijacked to become a HYPE for foils on everything, even your grandma!
It doesn't then take long for it to degenerate into a S--T FIGHT.

 

at some length less than required for an ocean going yacht ... under the right conditions of flat water and just the right wind speed and angle ... maybe ...

Pick a length 40ft? 52ft? 60ft? 70ft?

You do a Rube Goldberg School of Yacht Design boat and post the specs ... any kid with a 10th grade grasp of physics will prove that the multi will be faster.

A 40ft cat will have a near 40ft beam. More than 50% of it's weight will transfer to RM.

A canting keel 40ft boat with a 60% ballast/weight ratio would have to put the ballast ... um ... (maths R hard) ... 40 ft to windward ... it's a canting keel ... so the draft would be ... um ... 50-60 ft? Where the hell are you going to be able to sail a boat with 50-60foot draft?

How high is it going to foil? 6 feet? 12 feet? What will happen when the wave height = the foiling height?

Absolutely no grasp of reality ...

 

Thank You!
I just got home to see this thread turned into another Foiler "discussion".
Two threads (that I know of) were not good enough, we made a third one.

We know, we deal with it too. You just live with it, But it seems like you guys thrive on it. One of the posts in another "Foiler Thread" said something like *I cant wait to get up in the morning to see what nugget of info you have posted*.
WTF! I know its sarcasm, but still..
A decent topic got wrecked..
I'm starting a new thread in Open Discussion.
I'm going to call it "Foilers; facts, lies, and whatever else"

 

Figgy, you are right on the money!

I joined this forum some months ago, because I am really interested in sailing of all flavours, and especially unusual designs. I like having a challenging discourse with like minded people and hopefully we can feed off each others ideas and experiences.
It just shows that it only takes one rotten apple to spoil the entire show.
Now I still can have a serious participation in Boatbuilding and Materials threads, (as he has no ability to input there), but the Sailboats and Multihulls headings are just about F----D now, unfortunately.
Therefore the only thing left is creative "Sarcastic Writing" in the threads that get F----D up! However this is not my preference as I much prefer boats to sarcasm.
The real problem is that he is so thick skinned that you can't get rid of him.

 

Incredible!

I find it just plain amazing that when somebody like me suggests a possible answer to the question that Juan K did not answer technically that I am accused of hijacking a thread! NOBODY else came up with any plausible way that canting keels could be as fast as a multihull. But several people spent forum space with personal attacks and NOT ONE SHRED of evidence why my assesment of the "future of canting ballast technology"was wrong!!!! Several people have made it their vocation in life to attack me personally and all you have to do is read their non-technical non-relevant BS to see who "hijacked" the thread and who simply has no clue how to discuss the question THAT STARTED THIS THREAD.

 

canting ballast vs multihulls

Mr. Hough, I'm not the only one that believes that the combination of foils and canting ballast will breathe new life into the old mono vs multi debate as I pointed out in detail earlier. Whether you choose to accept EVEN THE POSSIBILITY or not is of no consequence since some very experienced ocean racers and yacht designers DO believe in the combination providing significant speed increases for ocean racing monohulls.
And if you believe SAIL magazine there is not that far to go since they say a G-Class cat(100+') is only 5mph faster than a Volvo Open 70 equipped with a canting ballast system. And if you look at the FACT that the use of foils in the Moth class increased speed at least 20% you can see that potential surely exists for foil equipped canting ballast monohulls to be AT LEAST as fast as a multi their own length.
According to Sail: VO 70 top speed 40.6 knots. G-Class Cat top speed: 45 knots. If you increase the VO 70 speed by 20%, as may be possible with hydrofoils, you have 48.7knots-case closed! It is absolutely clear , if you believe the information from Sail, combined with the real world actual performance of bi-foil systems that the combination with canting ballast will be extremely fast-- which answers the question put to Juan K pretty definitively: the future of canting ballast is pretty damn exciting!