Should Power Assited Systems be Allowed?

first of all, i am not a fan of multihulls, but there is no way "a 60' Maxi Skiff to whup a 60' Orma 60 multihull."

second of all, this is sailing, and using an engine to increase your speed potential is just wrong, period.

 

".......ballast,.....very light weight.........." This is a contradiction in terms. A very light weight boat doesnt carry ballast. How many of the mega maxi-cats and tri's used in the round the world races have capsized? These boats can outrun any weather system, (unlike mono's) therefore they are actually fairly safe from a capsize point of view. There is much greater danger from collisions with floating objects than there is of capsizing them. Could that be said of a canting keel boat who's keel is sticking out to one side or the other, and whos canting system isn't working (maybe out of fuel?) and which needs to gybe or tack in order to avoid hitting something? Weve already seen a boat unable to gybe because its diesel stopped. Anyway it's all irrelevant: a sailboat race should not have motorized boats in it, pure and simple. If you want a fast, comfortable, and reasonably inexpensive boat, you need to get away from the monohull dogma.

 

Dogma

Bethwaite and Langman are about as far away from "monohull dogma" or any dogma as you can get. Ideas such as their's and foiling canting keel boats may change the face of big boat sailing.
Get over the powered ballast phobia-it's here to stay and the boats- whatever they are called-- will just get faster and faster...

 

its like letting mike tyson use horse shoes insted of gloves ????

 

Once upon a time, the vested interests in mono-hulls got beaten by a catamaran. Their response was to ban multi-hulls from racing even though they broke no rules.

The big money is still in mono-hulls, only now they change the rules to allow boats that would have been cheating to race ... and they still don't race against multi-hulls.

As far as CBTF record claims go, the truth is that CBTF boats don't hold any that I know of (I only checked the ones claimed in this forum).

The Newport-Bermuda record is held by Play Station at 16.45 knots in 2000.

Morning Glory managed 13.1 knots in 2004.

The Trans-Pac record is held by Bruno Peyron and Explorer. The record is 17.2 knots average in 1997.

The best Morning Glory could do was 13.9 knots average in 2005.

Only someone with a very cloudy crystal ball would think that going from 17.2 knots to 13.9 knots in 7 years is progress.

The Sydney-Hobart record is held by Mari-Cha III, a water ballasted mono.

Of the records claimed for CBTF boats it turns out that NONE of the records are held by CBTF.

My vision is clear.

Sailboats don't use engines.

 

Bethwaite has no track record designing ocean racing boats.

Langman chose a super-maxi over the Open 66 in the S-H this year.

Here are some of his comments:

“We did a safe gybe and decided to put the spinnaker back up and just as we did the boom exploded.

“We left the mainsail up despite the broken boom until we got to Tasman Island. We couldn’t work out how to get it down.

“In the end it was either it would take itself off or get it off so we turned head to wind, got it down and struggled with a tri-sail and small jib from there on.”

It sounds like a very Sean Langman moment. He and his crew are more commonly associated with his “skiff on steroids”, the Open 66 they have sailed so successfully in recent years with their go-for-broke, never-die-wondering attitude. She is also called AAPT and this year raced to Hobart under charter by a Tasmanian skipper under the name Coogans Stores.

The Open 66 is the sort of rough and ready flier that will always break her crew before she breaks herself, while the bigger maxi AAPT, with her electronic winches and canting keel, is an altogether more sophisticated if somewhat more brittle beast. You arm-wrestle the big skiff to Hobart, constantly grinding the winches to catch waves. On the maxi the sails come in and out with the press of a button.

“It’s very dry and comfortable,” Langman observed at Constitution Dock.

“I went to the bow a few times - never got wet there either.

“We had a dry navigation station so we could see what was going on. It’s good having the technology but I must say I do prefer sailing where you feel like you have been out there challenging the whole thing.

So while everybody else is wrapped in the new technology, and the fact that ocean racing rather than the America's Cup is where the big advances in yacht design are happening these days, Langman seems less than impressed.

 

why do some people consider "ideas" technology?

 

CBTF wins!

In my post #64, point #3 I said "CBTF boats have won and set new meaningful records in the Transpac, Bermuda Race and Sydney-Hobart".In Randy's post # 125 he says:" Of the records claimed for CBTF boats it turns out that none of the records are held by CBTF".
1) According to www.reichel-pugh.com under "news" Morning Glory a MaxZ86 CBTF race boat finished first obliterating the Transpac Course record and also won Division 1 on corrected time.
--------
2) On the same website it is stated that on June 22 ,2004 Morning Glory took line honors in the demonstration division of the Newport-Bermuda Race to unofficially beat the record by 5 hours.
---------
3) On the Syndney-Hobart website Wild Oats is acknowleged as winning the Treble:a) New Course record, b) line honors,c) 1st on handicap -for the FIRST time in over 50 years...
Rolex Sydney Hobart Yacht Race 2005.. Winner takes all for Wild Oats XI
Address:http://rolexsydneyhobart.com//news.asp?key=2282
Amazing....

 

Langman

In this article Sean Langman says:"I also think I have to learn about wing masts and canting keels which are pretty much the future of monohull racing."
Sailing World's Grand Prix Sailor
Address:http://old.cruisingworld.com/gps/2001/0802/ Changed:12:02 PM on Monday, October 3, 2005
--------------------
And check this out: the article is interesting but the renderings of Langmans version of a "MaxiSkiff" are just extraordinary. You may understand better what I was talking about earlier: both Bethwaite and Langman have awesome visions of the future in monohull(they are monohulls ,right?) racing. And they are not anywhere near as alone as I am in this thread.
Sailing Anarchy InnerViews Sean Langman 2005
Address:http://www.sailinganarchy.com/innerview/2005/langman.htm Changed:10:02 PM on Sunday, October 23, 2005
--
Hey, Will-you back yet?!

 

Lorsail said:
And check this out: the article is interesting but the renderings of Langmans version of a "MaxiSkiff" are just extraordinary.

And they are not anywhere near as alone as I am in this thread.

Sailing Anarchy InnerViews Sean Langman 2005
Address:http://www.sailinganarchy.com/innerv...05/langman.htm Changed:10:02 PM on Sunday, October 23, 2005
____________________________________________

Howdy Lorsail,

I might disagree with your position, but I am really glad you are here to express it!!!

I think that most of the posts here have been thoughtful - including yours!

So cheers for that.

But to the battle!

MAXISKIFF: Why on earth would you put a keel on a trimaran? Even a canting one!

And those two outer hulls will slow the boat awfully when they hit the water. If they make them a better shape the boat will keep its apparent wind up better when they hit the water.

The MAXISKIFF proves my point exactly - the more you look for performance the more the boats start to look like multihulls

Let's see how quick it is when it hits the water - it is just a drawing at this stage.

Logic would say that it will be a slow trimaran in most conditions.

MAXISKIFF will still be slower than a multi in most conditions because you cant get the crew or ballast as far out to windward. And you cant use the windward hull (cat) - or two windward hulls (tri) for more stablity when they are flown.

Lets see how the MAXISKIFFS speed and safety compares with a multi of the same length and purpose. The canting keelers are pretty interesting in tacks and gybes during short course stuff - watching them in a blow gives a real sense of crash and burn type danger! Great TV! Make em compulsory for the America's Cup! I might start watching it again.

But multis you can just tack and gybe - no dramas at all. Dull television in comparison.

The MAXISKIFF will be much trickier to sail in comparison to the current crop of canters. A boat to sail on the apparent wind, but if you lose the apparent she will stagger and simply blow over if it wasn't for HER OTHER TWO HULLS.

However a multi may find it very hard to compete with the MAXISKIFF in light winds. If the MAXISKIFF doesnt have too much ballast or too long a keel so the wetted surface gets out of control.

MIK

my web page

 

For everyones information

MAXISKIFF

 

The World Sailing Speed Record Council doesn't agree. There just might be some bias in the reporting by the designer of Morning Glory and the sponsors of the S-H. BTW Wild Oats does not have the first triple, the Rolex site can't even get history right. I don't expect truth from self-serving sources.

Morning Glory has two monohull records, not the real records. The real records are held by sailboats.

The WSSRC has no bias, as they stated, they are not political and are obliged to recognize records set by boats that are legal under the rules of their event. Just as I was obliged to admit that Wild Oats won her race fair and square since she broke none of the rules she raced under. I don't like it but I can't argue the point.

The numbers don't lie, Morning Glory is just not that fast. Neither is Wild Oats. Fast for leadmines under a grossly relaxed definition of "sailing", but not fast sailboats.

16.45 vs 13.10 which is faster?
16.45 by 20%
17.20 vs 13.90 which is faster?
17.20 by 20%

Getting the rules changed and spending lots of money to "sail" 20% slower is not progress.

How much bigger will the engine have to be to get 20% more speed out of the rule benders?

If that rendering turns into a real boat, it should get protested out of any race that doesn't allow multi-hulls, or the outriggers had better never touch water on the leeward side of the boat.

 

Non sense and sense

Non sense
====================
A) Saying records owned by Morning Glory and recognized by the Race authority aren't real records doesn't make sense.
B) Quoting WSSRC in discussing the races I mentioned doesn't make any sense.
C) Quoting speeds from different or the same race in different conditions doesn't make any sense.
D) Saying that Morning Glory, Pyewacket, Wild Oats, Alfa Romeo and the VOR fleet aren't fast doesn't make any sense.
E) Saying that monohulls are not sailboats is ludicrous and doesn't make any sense.
================================
Sense
==================
Buoyancy pods on the Maxi Skiffs are not designed to be sailed on-that would be real slow ; they are there for emergencies and to provide cover for the crew, strutural strength at the end of the racks and a place for ballast.They are being used on the M4 monohull foiler and have been used on the Moth. The discussion will go on about this type:
1) Evidence for the trimaran position: Frank Bethwaite called his little HSPs that used very small pods a "trimaran".They look sort of like trimarans.
2)Evidence for the J. Bethwaite/Langman position: the pods are not designed to be sailed on or to develop RM except in emergencies. F. Bethwaites small "hulls" actually did touch the water during normal sailing.Modern ORMA tris are designed to be able to fly the main hull while sailing on the ama; these aren't Both boats use fixed or canting keels and ,of course, trimarans don't have ballasted keels.Both boats should be self righting from, at least, a pitch pole-trimarans aren't. Both boats are configured to be able to use very light weight Bi-Foil hydrofoil systems for full flying, altitude controlled, foiling.
-----
Note for Michael: many "lightweight" boats also carry "ballast" like the Moth. It is an open, though very interesting, question about using movable ballast on large multihulls: works good on small ones and I bet- if very well designed-- it would work on bigger ones-but that's another subject.
Current ORMA trimarans use foil assist consisting of one "banana board" each side; at least one uses a rudder t-foil some of the time.To work safely and effectively this system requires the ama to be partially submerged.
Since the system has no altitude control and speed regulates altitude there have been numerous accidents related to the ama becoming airborn.Much less efficient foil system than possible on the Maxi Skiffs. A Maxi Skiff sailing on just two foils could be an Orma beater in much the same way as the Moth beats all catamarans under 21' in conditions that are good for both boats.
=====================
The combination of movable ballast and hydrofoils is a potent racing combination almost certain to revolutionize big boat sailing at least after the problems associated with the crap in the ocean are dealt with.

 

The definition of Record takes care of A & B

Record
An extreme attainment; the best performance ever attested (as in a sport).

C) If "Quoting speeds from different or the same race in different conditions doesn't make any sense." then the performance of Morning Glory and Wild Oats cannot be compared to prior race results, and no "records" were set. You cant have it both ways.

D) Thinking that average speeds 20% slower makes a boat fast does make sense?

E) Monohulls can be sailbaots. Power assisted boats only can be called sailboats after the rules that define sailing were changed. Calling power-assisted boats sailboats because they have sails makes as much sense as calling a Kawasaki Ninja a bicycle because it has two wheels.

===

Self adjusting foils on multi-hulls are nothing new. The Hobbie Tri-foiler, the Wave Rider, UFO, an EIFO all have such systems.

The same logic that says the maxi-skiff is not a multi-hull would argue that Play Station and Explorer are mono-hulls as long as they keep one hull out of the water. In my opinion the maxi-skiff is a design that is trying to get around the multi-hull ban. Emergency only ... right ... Look at the angles, the boat will heel when fully powered up, when sailing in gusts the leeward float will touch down. That makes the boat a part-time trimaran.

Basic physics again:

Sail Carrying Power is limited by Righting moment. A catamaran uses more than 50% of it's weight to add RM. PlayStation has a 60 foot beam and displaces 38,500 pounds. That gives 1,155,000 (over ONE MILLION) lb/ft of RM! The RM/Displacement ratio is 30:1

Do the math, a Schock 40 Displaces 7,000 pounds and has a RM of 10800 pounds (at 0 heel). Giving a RM/Displacement ratio of 1.5:1 An 18ft skiff has a RM/Displacement ratio of about 8:1

Try to design a mono that has a RM/Displacement Ratio of even 10:1 much less 30:1

The racing rules got changed to allow power-assisted canters, maybe they can get the laws of physics changed too?

If my wife runs a marathon in 7 hours I can claim a new record. I'll ignore that the race has been run in under 2:15, I'll claim a record anyway. I'll post it on the net and someone will site it as "proof" that she holds a record. When asked how I make that claim, I'll simply state that it's a record because my record book only includes women I love and she's the fastest.

The power assisted boats hold records only in the minds of those that love them.

Look at open sailing records, you will not find a mono-hull at the top except on the one-mile and 500 metre courses.

Not only is power assist morally wrong, it also does not produce fast boats.

 

Doug, if you stopped using multihulls to compare to your canting keel monohulls performace then they would look fast. But you keep comparing a 100' supermaxi and a 60' "maxiskiff" to maxi cats and ORMA 60's. If you compare ANY monohull to a multihull of almost any sort it will look slow.

Fact: Wild Oats is a fast monohull, and fast compared to other monohulls.
Fact. multihulls are faster than monohulls, so if you want to make a monohull look slow, compare it to a multihull.

The CBTF "records" are only records for monohulls under a certain length/rating number.
Mari Cha IV is capable of destroying any of these records, and maxi cats hold the true records.

Also, why would you call it "Maxiskiff"? A maxi is generally a boat over 70 feet. Anything shorter is considered a "pocket maxi" if it is designed as such. And today a 70-86 foot maxi is considered small compared to what the Aussies and New Zealanders have.