CBTF(Canting Ballast Twin Foil)

Discussion in 'Sailboats' started by Doug Lord, Sep 25, 2003.

  1. Peregrin Falcon
    Joined: May 2005
    Posts: 5
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: fr

    Peregrin Falcon Junior Member

    it is so fast u can't see it. :eek:

    Hey doug that's post 666, u beast :D
     
  2. Paul B

    Paul B Previous Member

    I wonder if you use the term "designed" like most people do. Linesplan, Arrangement, Construction Details, Machinery, etc, etc. Somehow I don't think so.


    So you are now making it a trimaran? Are you saying that it can't foil because it can't reach the required takeoff speed?


    I have a friend who builds some of the best RC one meters out there. He has no patents, but can't keep up with demand. Oh well.


    Breakthroughs like that must be in great demand, eh? Obtaining a patent doesn't mean something is a good idea to begin with.


    So part of your CV is you know someone who ordered a boat from someone else, for a class almost no one sails? Sorry, I wasn't aware.


    The military must be paying you millions on that one, eh?


    You have a patent but somehow can't seem to answer anyone's questions about the potential downsides to this idea. I'm sure the world is beating down your door for permission to use this one. How is that Mini coming along anyway?


    I guess we are all supposed to be impressed by patent claims. You seem to be. Obtaining a patent isn't that remarkable these days. Wouldn't you agree making money on the patented item is the goal, not simply obtaining it? If you can't sell the idea it is a waste of time and money to get the patent in the first place. Patenting an idea that no one else wants to use is not a very intelligent use of funds.

    My name happens to be on more than one patent that generated millions of US Dollars in revenue. Yesterday I reviewed some SLA models of parts I designed in CAD that will generate millions more in revenue. The attorney says I have until mid June to provide him with the final drawings for the patent.

    I guess I should have better spent my time patenting strange sailplans, or maybe circular cockpits, or something useful like that?



    I'm not delusional. I don't claim other people's work as my own. I don't glom onto others' breakthrough ideas and try to make it sound as if I am involved.

    I have worked in a yacht design office that produced many more designs than you list, with many times more boats built from those designs than your sum. But even if my initials are on a majority of the drawings they were not "my" designs.


    Anyone who disagrees with your rants is "uninformed".

    FYI, reading magazine articles and websites, then spewing the things you read over and over and over again (sometimes inaccurately) in countless threads about the same topics is not "positively contributing to the understanding of modern technology".

    You are just some hanger-on who's trying to capitalize by a ham-fisted attempt at associating with your name with people who ARE making contributions.
     
  3. Paul B

    Paul B Previous Member

    That is right CT. What he said is there was a 20% gain using the Maximus config, but the CBTF people had something BETTER.

    All very funny. The CBTFco folks should be horrified that this guy is acting as their spokesperson on the net.
     
  4. usa2
    Joined: Jan 2005
    Posts: 538
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 11
    Location: Maine

    usa2 Senior Member

    there is no way CBTF can provide a 20% improvement in windward performance-that would mean that they would sail faster than an ACC boat upwind. The two CBTF boats that are comparable to ACCs are slower than them upwind by about a knot to 2 knots. Doug, are you suing BMW Oracle Racing over their square-headed mainsail? It seems a lot like your Wing-Tip Rig. I also think Alinghi has one too.
     
  5. Doug Lord

    Doug Lord Guest

    Disgrace:willfull infringement

    From a letter byCBTFco attorney to the Maximus gang:
    United States law provides that anyone whoever, without authority,makes,USES(my caps),or sells any patented invention within the United States, or imports into the United States any patented invention during the term of the patent therefore,infringes the patent."
    -------------
    ""It is abundantly clear that the System manufactured and installed on the Vessel,constitutes a "patented invention" that infinges CBTFco's Patents. It is further without dispute that the System was designed, manufactured, installed and used by the Owners and the Contributors in full awareness of CBTF's Patents and all of the details publically available and disclosed when the patents were granted. Given this actual knowledge of the Patents, and the apparently misplaced reliance upon the "temporarily present" exemption thought available, those involved actively induced, contributed and aided and abetted the Systems creation and employment in the Vessel.The flaw, in undertaking to use the patented Invention and evade payment of the $87,500 royalty required for permissive use, was the commercial element of the Owners' commercial venture to be executed in the United States. Once the Vessel entered the territorial waters of the United States for that purpose, it infringed the Patents,thereby subjecting all those reposible, Owners,designers and builders alike, to those liabilities imposed by law on PATENT INFRINGERS( my emhasis).
    ===============
    CBTF converted a 30' Catalina years ago for tests using the same exact system now on Maximus; they found the all moving foil better for manouverabiity but considered then as they do now that a daggerboard using a flap(trimtab) in conjunction with a canting keel and certain other elements constitutes INFINGEMENT. They have the pictures and may still have the boat to prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt!
    It's a damn disgrace that these people would have so little regard for the law and knowingly infringe these patents. It is fantastic that they were caught in the act!
    See the full letter on SailingAnarchy.com
     
  6. usa2
    Joined: Jan 2005
    Posts: 538
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 11
    Location: Maine

    usa2 Senior Member

    yes, and CBTFco is accusing Maximus of having commercial interests with their keel and foil system. Thats a load of bull. And as you say, its United States law, not international. Lets see CBTFco catch Maximus while she is at sea.
    The real losers in this case (regardless of the actual outcome) will be all the major regattas in the US because now Maximus, Skandia, and Nicorette will not come to the US to race if they have to put up with this. Also, Doug, you should watch what you say about Maximus's owners and designers.
     
  7. Doug Lord

    Doug Lord Guest

    anonymity!

    Thats funny: I've got to watch what I say and the gutless anonymous posters here and on Sailing Anarchy can slander , personaly insult and in every other way dis the owners and creators of CBTF! Hah! Bring it on! I'm not sure how protected some of these anonymous guys are -we may find out....
     
  8. Paul B

    Paul B Previous Member

    This has what to do with the price of tea in China? If there was such a Cat 30 it is an interesting line of development, but has no bearing on the issue. I have seen the Cat30 CBTF. But the real question is, "Where is this foil layout stipulated in the patent?"

    Since you are THE EXPERT on this topic, please cite the section of the appropriate patent that shows this to be covered specifically. If you build a test bed but it never makes it into the patent then it doesn't matter. If it is specifically mentioned in the patent then it does matter, test bed or not.

    So let's hear the specific verbage.
     
  9. usa2
    Joined: Jan 2005
    Posts: 538
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 11
    Location: Maine

    usa2 Senior Member

    Im saying you should watch what you say about them because you are a known advocate of CBTF and they (EBS Yachting and Elliot YAcht design) could indirectly link you to them and if CBTF loses their case, then they might try a lawsuit with you for the hell of it. And you are not anonymous to begin with, so i wouldnt be surprised if some of Maximus's crew reads this site or Sailing Anarchy and has found out lots about you and where you stand on the CBTF issue. This whole thing is like a re-enactment of the AC in 88', with legality of boats going to court and stuff. That was stupid then, this is stupid now.
     
  10. Doug Lord

    Doug Lord Guest

    CBTF and anono's

    Let me give you a little information: this threatened retribution can work two ways and those that think their so-called anonymity protects them are living in lala land if push comes to shove. It won't most likely but for every list on one side I'm sure there is an equally litigious list on the other side.
    It's a gross oversimplification to say this is "stupid": under the LAW CBTFco has NO CHOICE but to proceed to defend this patent but for the Beat the Patent boyz to rip off the technology and then flaunt it while engaging in business in New York harbor would add comic levity to this whole thing if that conduct wasn't so reprehensible! "Stupid" is appropriate there for sure....
     
  11. usa2
    Joined: Jan 2005
    Posts: 538
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 11
    Location: Maine

    usa2 Senior Member

    Doug, what "business" is Maximus conducting?
     
  12. Doug Lord

    Doug Lord Guest

    Transatlantic

    It is gratifying to see that a CBTF boat is again in the lead of a major ocean race!
    I have nothing against the 100' Maximus and hope they win the Tranatlantic race against the 140' Mari Cha !
    Even an early form of CBTF is fast!
    ====================
    Just for the record there is almost a 20% difference between the theoretical maximum hull speeds of both boats.....
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 27, 2005
  13. nico
    Joined: Jan 2003
    Posts: 190
    Likes: 6, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 52
    Location: SF

    nico Senior Member

    I think it is for these kind of erroneous/misleading comments that u have been critisized here in this forum.
    First, saying that Maximus is a CBTF boat.
    And for the reasons behind MariCha lack of performance see http://www.thedailysail.com/.
     
  14. usa2
    Joined: Jan 2005
    Posts: 538
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 11
    Location: Maine

    usa2 Senior Member

    first doug says maximus doesnt resemble a CBTF set-up when the super maxi originally came out. Now that CBTF is suing them and Maximus is beating a damaged 140 footer and has been accused of being CBTF-indirectly CBTF as her foil system is different from any other CBTF boat- doug now says Max is CBTF. Are Skandia and Nicorette CBTF? They have a system that is identical to Maximus's.
     

  15. Doug Lord

    Doug Lord Guest

    Facts

    Unlike some on this forum I am willing to update my opinion based on facts. I have recently been made aware of certain facts that show conclusively that the owners of Maximus have infringed CBTFco's patent.
    My reference to Maximus as a CBTF boat(while said with a smile on my face) is therefore accurate and I hope she wins.
    Nico, in the AC it was too bad that Team NZ ,that I supported, broke down but it was symptomatic of a problem with the whole program; whatever the root cause it cost them and NZ the Americas Cup. Whatever the cause with Mari Cha is of no matter at this point: Maximus is in the lead and I hope she wins.
    The reference to their theoretical hull speeds was also meant with a touch of humor given what was said in several past posts and is accurate assuming theoretical hull speed had any meaning anymore.
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.