Geert,
<br>
<br>>>Thanks for answering that quickly, I agree with your answers, except one point, the weight issue.
<br>
<br>Okay, well that leaves only one point to discuss further. I won't react as quickly this coming weeks however for I have visitors staying the week.
<br>
<br>
<br>>>First Your calculation of a extra light Taipan, I think it’s quite a bit too enthusiastic calculated, let’s go to the details:
<br>
<br>That is was, I admit that.
<br>
<br>**** Carbon mast -4 kg: (you agreed)
<br>
<br>****; as I calculate it for the same section as a taipan, the reduction would be about 15%; my boards are 1.9 and 2kg; so that gives a reduction of 0.5kg total. (Lets assume that your estimate is correct.)
<br>
<br>*** For the rudders/stocks: they also are already light at 5kg total, but let’s say You can get 1.5 kg reduction with carbon (I go with you again)
<br>
<br>**** Spi pole + Boom –2kg:
<br>My Boom=1.44kg, Suppose in carbon it’s 70% of it’s weigh, and you get a reduction from 0,432kg.
<br>Pole: 70% of 2.5kg gives 0.75 kg
<br>
<br>I would like to have the density of prepreg Carbon, but judging from my stunt kite carbon poles the carbon tudes are about 1/3 of alu wehn dimensions are the exactly the same including wall thickness.
<br>
<br>I would say boom and pole = reduction of 3,96 * 2/3 = 2,64 kgs or double your reduction. I'm quite sure but I will check my claim.
<br>
<br>**** Dynema trapeze/pole wires –2kg:
<br>My total shrouds, including trapezes wires are just 2.5 kg! So I don’t think you can get more than 0.5 kg.
<br>
<br>Ohh, believe me the reduction is that big. The Dogbones together are heavier than the 3 mm dyneema line and plastic handle bars. I could also replace my oringinal bungee cords 5mtr. in total of 5 mm diameter (needed to avoid slapping) by 3 mm bungees. Honestly, 2 kg on 2,5 maybe alot but 1,5 you get definately for the dyneema trapwires setup is less than 1 kgs in total. Try the dyneema, you love it. No slapping, no bungee cord pulling heavily on your dogbone, no wear on your sailspockets.
<br>
<br>>>This gives a total reduction of about 7.5 kg,
<br>>>This means 111-7.5=103.5 kg.
<br>
<br>I would like to adjust that by -2,5 kg's as discussed. resulting in a 101 kg Taipan F16 HP.
<br>
<br>Now, lets say that someone gets the bright idea of replacing his forebeam at the same time he buys the carbon mast. The profile is the same and he can easily ask for 8,5 + 2,5 mtr = 11 meter carbon mastsection with a reinforced lower 2,4 mtrs. He'll pay about the same in production cost just a little added cost due to more reasin and carbon and saw of the bottom 2,5 mtr to make it into his forebeam. Now he will have a below 100 kg's Taipan.
<br>
<br>So I think the point is not if this minimum weight could be achived be readily available means. I think this point is important.
<br>
<br>A professional builder like Boyer and BIM can do these adjustments without must effort. I think this setup is state of the art and should therefor be placed as such in the F16HP
<br>
<br>
<br>>> That’s just my Taipan, I think we also have to ask John Pierce (Stealth), as designer maybe he can tell if a stealth for example could be brought at 100kg, including spi. (=15kg reduction, and the stealth has already a carbon mast.
<br>I suppose it will be very hard to achieve this.
<br>
<br>
<br>And this is where you have a good point ! I see this a the only problem of the 100 kg's minimum weight. We
<br>'ll continue on this.
<br>
<br>
<br>I’d also like to hear John’s opinion, for me I think 100kg, excluding spi or 105 kg with spi would be the absolute minimum.
<br>
<br>OKay, Best is to get John P. opinion. I coute him before where he indicated that he thought 100 kg was resonable, but I don't know wether the Stealth could be made 100 kg's. MInd you the Stealth was designed have a optimal crewweight of 145 kg's so the Genaker equipement is already corrected by the 150 - 145 kg = 5 kg crewweight difference ! Spo overall over weightness now is 9 kg according to Texel measurement.
<br>
<br>
<br>>>Keep on the good work,
<br>
<br>And the constructive discussion ! It helps the forming of the F17HP alot ! And yes I will continue the work. Hell, if this F16 HP takes off than I have a good mind of modifying my T to be a perfect F16 HP in order to function as an example.
<br>
<br>And thank you very much for contributing !
<br>
<br>Greetings
<br>Wouter
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br><br><br>