Design for DSS-Foil Assist for Keelboats

Doug:

Don't know why I bother to post links to definitions. For a productive conversation to occur we have to agree what words mean. Obviously you have a different understanding of words than do many other other people.

I have not pointed out that the conclusions you've reached are speculation. I have pointed out that they are not adequate to be deemed facts when evaluated by scientific method. As Paul pointed out most if not all the points you call "facts" fit the definition of anecdotal evidence perfectly. You obviously choose to make the leap from anecdotal evidence to "fact".

To most people, conclusions reached by anecdotal evidence may be correct, but certainly can't be designated facts or proof. To quote something I once read, "The plural of anecdote is not data". This basically is saying that lots of anecdotal evidence is not adequate to reach scientific proof.

Many of the items you have listed could possibly (and perhaps did) provide scientific evidence - but as presented on Boatdesign.net they do not provide enough detail to qualify. Raw data is not present, nor is a description of what exactly the tests were and what conditions are needed to duplicate them. There is no presentation of third party confirmation, data collected or independent peer review. You've posted conclusions reached without any means for the reader to determine or validate how those conclusions were reached. Please note I'm not questioning the potential of the technology - just the lack of scientific evidence to back up the conclusions. Bill Beaver's paper "Full Scale Measurements on a Hydrofoil International Moth" available on Boatdesign.net is an example of a paper presenting scientific evidence.

You are quick to label people pejoratively as naysayers, but what I'm saying is there isn't enough information to determine whether or not I am a naysayer or a "yea"sayer. As clearly pointed out, the jury is still out. I object to being labelled a naysayer when I have not yet reached any position on the matter.

Obviously, the major difference in our approaches centres on "trust". You obviously trust the inventor's reports and conclusions. You trust the reports you've read on the Internet regarding results and comparisons. "Trust" has no credibility in science. That does not mean the inventor is wrong, it does not mean their conclusions are wrong - it just means there has not been enough information provided for third parties to independently conclude they are right.

--
CutOnce

 

Dss

Isn't interesting that companies and individuals are investing millions of dollars
in a technology that the naysayers* claim is not backed up by scientific "proof"? It would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic......


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

* This words' usage is not directed at any one person but seems to accurately describe a group of individuals both on this forum and another forum.
*Definition: Definition of NAYSAYER
: one who denies, refuses, opposes, or is skeptical or cynical about something....
-
*Definition 2: nay·say (ns)
tr.v. nay·said (-sd), nay·say·ing, nay·says (-sz)
To oppose, deny, or take a pessimistic or negative view of....

 

Money spent doesn't equate to guaranteed success.I'm not making any judgment, only pointing out that invested money is only one indication of a concept's potential and appeal to those investors.

 

Dss

==============
My point is that there are numerous companies and individuals who believe that the technology works and is worth their investment. The scientifically based facts they were presented with obviously had a powerful effect on their decision making. People who have built companies and invested in tooling for DSS would not have done so without being 100% convinced of its viability-especially in the economic climate we're faced with now. Same with the customers of those companies.

 

Your American manners SUCK

Paul - the 'title' I chose - says it all - your manners truely SUCK in the worst way. Your personal comments about Frank show that you never met the man nor I would think - ever had anything to do with him or his family, like several people in here did.

I feel sure - that almost all Americans - in this forum - would feel extremely embarrased by your bad manners & verbal diarrhoea & like myself will be cringing for some time to come. Please stop - you make me feel ashamed !!!

Several of your so called 'knowledgeable comments' are atrocious & completely wrong. You were not there when all this was being done.

Again - do try very hard - to keep to the point - your actions & bad-mouth are most unbecomming of you & the spirit of this place. Your comment - seems - so completely - out of character I'm truely sorry such comments aren't - 'edited-out' - & the people that make them aren't banned.

You go & have a great day - read carefully - what I've had to say - think about it for a week & then see if you can at least - try to be polite. Do enjoy your lovely weekend sailing - Ciao, james

 

A technology with 'millions of dollars invested' in it is something to watch and try to find as many details about as possible. However, I won't assume anything works as predicted and advertised only because of the sum of money invested in it.

 

Dss

===============
I wouldn't either! Thats part of the reason for this thread: to inform as many people as possible about the technology from the history, development and science behind the concept thru to the DSS boats launched and raced so far, to the newest boats just launched and about to be launched. This thread provides a great deal of the proof any reasonable person would need to understand how it works and the proven advantages it can provide.
However, the sum of money invested in DSS is not the story-the real story is the confidence builders and owners have in the technology at this critical time in our economic history: the fact that companies are tooling up and owners are buying is serious evidence that these individuals and companies are convinced beyond a shadow of doubt of the viability of DSS technology.

 

Gooday Doug & any others that might care to advise me.

If it's not to far - off subject - how can I evaluate foils added to c/b's & rudders on ocean going miltihulls ??? Am going to add a foil to a c/b on a 'tackable c/b' in a 40' light-weight ocean going tri & also add a rudder foil. Don't know how big to make them or how far down the 'blades' to position them. Any advice will be great - but let's keep it - positive & on topic - please.

If this is not the right place for this subject - will someone - please move it to where it belongs - - he he - hope that will not mean - putting it in the bin. Ciao, james

 

==============
James, this might be a better thread for this kind of question: http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/multihulls/multihull-foil-assist-development-42062.html Not much to it so far but it may be a good place to start.
I personally think a variation of DSS has potential-at least on small trimarans-where the foil would be mounted forward of the forward crossarm and centered on the ama. It would allow for a smaller than normal ama and on a really high powered version could be used with two foils on the main hull-one on the daggerboard and one on the rudder. The best thing about a foil like this is that it creates tons vertical lift while drawing very little water.
--
If water depth is no great concern curved lifting foils or "L" foils offer more efficiency because they are further in the water all the time and both offer the adjustability of the lifting portion of the foil independent of the lateral resistance portion of the foil. Curved lifting foils may have a bit of an advantage since they can be used as surface piercing foils controlling their altitude by speed alone(no wand). "L" foils may need an altitude control system like a wand as would T-foils on a daggerboard.
Also check Martin Fischers A Class design concept here-a version of this not restricted by the vagaries of the A Class rules might over a lot of performance: http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/multihulls/mayfly-class-catamaran-fischer-39616.html -no altitude control because of curved main foils-Also see the large trimaran with foils by Fischer on the last page: curved lifting foils plus rudder t-foils...
Hope this helps a bit....

 

Somehow experts like you never seem to be able to cite specifics.

Oh, do enlighten us.

 

Lots more money invested in the Madoff investment strategy. Billions in fact.

Early reports from the inventor "proved" the system worked.

Loads of "data" shown to potential customers. There was no question it worked.

Oops.


Of course one person posting here claims the gizmo has been "proven" through tank testing. However he doesn't seem to know any details of that tank testing. He is unable to answer any questions about technical details.

Sounds like a perfect customer for the Madoffs of the world (if he had two nickles to rub together).

 

Paul - I'd like to mention - yet again -

You were not there.

You have never known any of the many people mentioned - or alude to know so much about - on a personal basis nor were you ever involved in the discussions that many of the people - you claim - to know so much about - had - back in those days - that you claim to know so much about.

You were never involved in any of the discussions that you are referring to 'as didn't happen'.

You were not even in the country, not in the city, not in the 'races' - where & when these discussions were taking place.

You were not present at the dozens & dozens of BBQ's - over the years - having a steak, prawns - a few tinnies & a good discussion about all manner of things boating - playing with the kids & in general having a grand time. I know my memory is slipping a tad - but I don't recall you being present.

You're way over you depth here.

You are most definately out of your knowledge zone - for sure.

As many many people in here - know full well - you have made precious few if any positive input comments - into this debate - it might be best to not voluntarily embarrass yourself further.

I do feel that your continued attitude is not a reflection of the mature attitude of the majority of people in these 'forums'

Now as to - "Oh, do enlighten us" No Paul - it's not "us" at all. It's you that are saying these many untrue things - that you don't really know - all that much about.

As far as "enlightening" you - very unlikely

Three facts I do know. 1/ Noboby can put 'brains' in monuments.
2/ Nobody can get a 'rock' to think.
3/ Empty, hollow vessels make the most usless noises.

So why anyone in here would be bothered trying to "enlighten" you is totally beyond me as well as many others.

 

Just as I thought. You have nothing. You are just another blowhard behind a keyboard.

I'll bet those BBQs were wonderous. Especially the ones where, over a tinnie, Uffa was learning all about how to design dinghies based on NS14s,.

 

Best to ignore the guy, SR. When nobody responds to his antics, he'll wander off to another thread, looking for more chances to be rude and cause trouble. I'm sure you know the old saying about wrestling with a pig.

 

Yes, but when the angle of attack exceeded 12 degrees they sucked the bow down (which, IIRC, disproves some claims here that such things do not occur).

The info is direct from owner/designer/skipper of the boat in question.