foiling 18

Discussion in 'Sailboats' started by John ilett, Aug 31, 2006.

  1. Chris Ostlind

    Chris Ostlind Previous Member

    Not going to haggle with you, Doug. Just go look at the start of the thread and see which Foiling 18 Ilett used for reference. Clearly, an Aussie 18 and not this non-Aussie 18, space frame with styro prototype.

    We see here with this new boat from the Swiss boys: no Aussie18 hull, nor Aussie18 sail set, no Aussie18 anything, really.

    What your point means is this: I can drop a set of foils on my 18' XCR sailing canoe/tri and righteously post it here as a foiling 18. You know, just slipping it in under the blankets, so to speak.

    Would anyone mind that it is a busted segue of type and style?
  2. Chris Ostlind

    Chris Ostlind Previous Member

    Quite frankly, they'll be toast and probably told to sell their old kit and invited to step-up to the newest version. Let's see, that'll get you something on the order of 10 cents on the dollar just spent for your old stuff, (if you're lucky) and you'll be doing your part to maintain sales for the BR factory at full pop.(less the rig, I suppose, as it could go over to the newer hull) Will the foils even be the same? Beats me.

    Just speculating here, but... If the BR guys do that, then they're toast with all the guys who just dropped the US$15 Large. If they (BR) don't do that and the newer foil placement proves to kick the existing BR's butts, then BR is toast again, as a winning machine unless they sneak the rigs to the factory team.

    We talked about this very thing something like a year and a half ago (or more) and it was fundamentally glossed over. Now, here it is come to visit in a big way, possibly.

    You can do these things when there's lots of installed units in the field, you are a really big company and the issues of busting out of the current mold have been honestly shared and are even expected. See: pro-level MX bikes for the rate of new gear streaming out of the works development team.

    Unfortunately, this kind of stuff can absolutely kill a new class of racing products if the buying public does not have the capability to absorb another pop for the 15 large.

    Should be interesting to watch, though.
  3. wind_apparent
    Joined: Apr 2008
    Posts: 257
    Likes: 6, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 96
    Location: boulder colorado

    wind_apparent wind driven speed addict

    so thats cool, the other smaller moth builders (who I totally respect) will just be able to change it out as "the new boat" like they always have.......I hope BR eats it.:p and the little guys get to just keep doing what they always did, build boats to a high quality standard in the country where they are going to be sailed without moving their opps to china so they can make big $$$$$$$$$$$$$ off slave labor.
  4. foilr
    Joined: Mar 2006
    Posts: 40
    Likes: 2, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 21
    Location: Sydney, Australia

    foilr Yes I've sailed one.

    Ever heard of globalisation?

    This chatter about ground-breaking placement of the front foil is laughable. Do you think BR (and the other Moth manufacturers) put their foils where they are by fluke?

    Moving the foils forward has been tried before. Moving them to the extremes has been tried. They are where they are because it works. BR aren't going to change their tooling because some guys on an 18 foot long carbon tube have their foil forward of the mast.
  5. Doug Lord

    Doug Lord Guest

    "Shared Lift"

    For those interested in exploring the concept of a forward vertical fin here is a link to Bill Roberts "Shared Lift" concept:
    This IS a breakthru if it really works and if the boat remains balanced. Whether it has been tried before in the Moth class is irrelevant IF they couldn't make it work and Thomas does. The system has been made to work on a 21' catamaran-so we'll have to see what Thomas has to say.
    I think the forward foil may be a real important design innovation for any monofoiler since it will drastically increase pitch stability.Way to go Thomas!
  6. Doug Lord

    Doug Lord Guest

    From Scuttlebutt this morning:
    Geneva, April 29, 2008 - The brand new sailing boat Mirabaud LX was
    presented to the media this morning at Société Nautique de Genève, in
    Switzerland. Supported by the Banque Mirabaud & Cie banquiers privés, this
    project is the result of Thomas Jundt's creativity and experience with
    highly competitive sailing boats. Aimed at flying on its hydrofoils, this
    33-foot prototype has a very special characteristic: it has no hulls,
    although a marginal floatability remains, aimed at preventing the boat from
    sinking until it reaches flying speeds (approx 8 knots). Conceived around a
    structure of carbon fiber tubes, weighing only 330 pound, this boat is a
    concentrate of high technology. Every single element has been optimized in
    order to reduce the overall weight and allow it to fly on its foils as
    quickly as possible. As of today, it is the only "hull less" boat on earth.
    -- Full story and photos:
    Technical datas :

    LOA : 10m

    Width (structure, without the ladders) : 1,8m

    Weight : 150 kg ( 25 kg for the foils)

    Surface of sails (upwind) : 32m2

    Surface of sails (downwind) : 62m2
  7. bistros

    bistros Previous Member

    Calling it a Foiling 18 is the problem. The whole world is pretty clear on what an 18 is. This isn't an 18. Just because it is approximately 18 feet long isn't an excuse. Call it a Foiling TinkerToy or whatever - not a Foiling 18.

    I see a Grand Prix 18 every time I go to my club. This project hasn't got anything to do with it.

    I can only think of one person who spends 24/7 searching the web for obscure threads instead of going out sailing like the rest of us. Having a new thread to document and discuss this space frame foiler shouldn't be a hardship, as he's already aware of it.
  8. Doug Lord

    Doug Lord Guest

  9. Chris Ostlind

    Chris Ostlind Previous Member

    Here's something kinda amusing.

    In a post yesterday, Doug indicates that this new prototype boat is a Foiling 18. That is indicated in his post quote below.

    And now here, in a post that was just put up over on Sailing Anarchy, Doug says this:

    "What is it? Can you not read? Are you just not interested? Can't afford the Daily Sail? Christ, the guy described in detail that THIS IS A PROTOTYPE. That they will be shortly adding a 24' cat hull to the structure. That they will test all kinds of possibilities.
    Comments like yours from the BLACK HOLE of uninformed ignorance are pitiful!!"

    If you can ignore the syntax and the abusive references, Doug is clearly saying that the boat will soon be a Foiling 24 and not a Foiling 18. So, what is it really Doug; a 24, or your previously claimed 18?

    I think it's time to move the discussion to the New Swiss Foiling Machine thread on these pages, where no such confusion will be present.

    Of course, Doug, you are always welcome to post your thoughts on the new thread.

  10. Doug Lord

    Doug Lord Guest


    It is a Foiling Prototype-whose developmental story- from the very first days of being pulled by a powerboat- is here in words and pictures.
    Chris you must be an ultra right wing politico-quoting only one side of "discussion" 'cause it fits your agenda.
  11. Chris Ostlind

    Chris Ostlind Previous Member

    The Case of the Tangled Web

    Isn't irony delicious?
  12. Meanz Beanz
    Joined: Jun 2007
    Posts: 2,280
    Likes: 33, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 585
    Location: Lower East ?

    Meanz Beanz Boom Doom Gloom Boom

    18' Skiff's where born for the public spectacle, they more than any other class I know of are about the audience. They have had a constant history of change and resistance to it, ultimately the newer faster more spectacular boats have always won out. The foiling machine is just another step along a well trodden path, the concept that an 18' is a well defined formula that must be adhered to is redundant if you look at the history of the class. If that where so we'd still be sailing the original big boats with out of season rugby teams as crew. This idea will eventually succeed or fail on its merit and its relevance to the ideal that has driven the 18's since day one. Believe me if the sponsors think that the foiling frame will gain an audience the money will flow and the boats will race, that's 18's, a high powered, sponsored spectacle. This is where this type of craft has a more legitimate home, it fits with the heritage of the 18's more so than trying to alter the heritage of events like the Olympics and the AC.
  13. Meanz Beanz
    Joined: Jun 2007
    Posts: 2,280
    Likes: 33, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 585
    Location: Lower East ?

    Meanz Beanz Boom Doom Gloom Boom

  14. bistros

    bistros Previous Member

    18' skiffs were "born" to bring shipped goods to shore as speedy harbour lighters. They weren't born to be a spectacle. Oz competitiveness and lust for conflict turned sailing the 18's into a contest, as any activity that has more than one Australian involved generally becomes a contest.

    There is history to the 18' skiffs, and they became a spectacle because any contest that involves more than one Australian will attract other Australians to wager upon the outcome. Oz being Oz, wagering caused the people involved to sponsor the participants to try to influence to outcome of upcoming contests. Sponsorship drove the arms race forward, and we arrived at the boats on the water today.

    Australians do have a sense of history and pride, and they have kept the 18' skiffs within a focused definition that allowed the arms race to progress in a careful but controlled fashion. 18' are monohull boats, not catamarans or geodesic space frames with sails. The space frame foiler developed by these folks is a great engineering enterprise, but it is not nor ever will be an 18' skiff. This development will be ignored by the Flying Squadron - I'd be willing to bet the topic will never even rate serious discussion.

    Sometimes genetic experiments stray too far from the donor DNA to be part of the family tree. In this case the resulting sail craft is interesting, an achievement and perhaps has met it's designer's intentions ..... but it is never going to contest for the GG.

  15. Meanz Beanz
    Joined: Jun 2007
    Posts: 2,280
    Likes: 33, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 585
    Location: Lower East ?

    Meanz Beanz Boom Doom Gloom Boom

    Read the link Bistro, about Mark Foy and what he started and why. He fully intended 18' skiff racing to be a public spectacle, to attract the public interest.

    Same history but maybe a more credible source for you...

    Like I said the public and the sponsors will decide the relevance or not of the design in the end, if it sparks their imagination and they want to see them race then it will be so.... no matter what you or I think of the craft.

    BTW, I also suspect that the 18's are bigger than Flying Squadron now, by that I mean if Europe and the US embrace a change and its sees commercial success, sponsorship, gains an audience etc... then the Flying Squadron will be under a deal of pressure, it would not be the first time the class has fractured.

    Also I am in no way predicting the outcome here, I'm just looking at the wider history of the class and thinking its not so misaligned with the heritage as one might first be tempted to think. To me it remains a curiosity and an uncertainty, lets see what the final form is before we judge to harshly, I am thinking that this thing will sprout a hull of some sort and that maybe your clear cut lines will not be as clear as they seem now. I suspect foils or no foils will be the biggest question to be addressed in the end, not the hull form... just a guess.

    Last edited: May 1, 2008
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.