new boat

For those of you who missed it on SA:

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=116434&pid=3084253&st=0&#top

Well, someone came up with macca's super-duper shiney carbon-everything and it's still 110Kg. Sure, it'll theoretically be stiffer than a 'standard' F16 but will it be quicker?

Do you reckon the cant on the boards is 6 deg or less? Only guessing but it looks like a fair bit. Sure that could be easily fixed. Not sure this particular boat has been built as an f16.

Hulls look great. So do the carbon beams.

Stiffer is better than lighter.

I would think this boat would dominate.

Till its on the water, raw specs are pretty useless.

After second look I could be wrong about the can't on the boards. Definitely looks pretty cool.

I very much doubt it'll dominate. The latest generation of F16s are pretty stiff already and the half-carbon Stealths are incredibly stiff too (and down to weight). Sure, this Bim will be no slouch, but it won't 'dominate'.

Ah the construction with the top panel removiable would sort of indicate that there could maybe see some rather large dagger board wells inserted, just maybe enough for adjustible cant or even better C boards AKA A class style. The rear hull shape would also indicate C boards are being thought about. But 110 kgs, why.

The username " lost in translation " has to sum up that statement.

On the topic of "Dominate", look at the A class, is there any one A cat design that dominates?

No.

Why?

Because once they have all hit the numbers, (max sail area, min wt. numbers) it comes down to the sailor's skill, as it should be.

So I don't think we will see any new design dominate the class, just like the A cats, since there are already several F16 designs out that already hit the numbers.

Bottom line; if you want to dominate, get a boat you like and sail the crap out of it. You can't buy skill, you have to get out and practice more if you want to go faster. A good skipper on a slow boat is always going to beat a poor skipper on a fast boat.

We haven't seen an F16 max out the available technology, or seen development all the way through either though.

Autoclaved, nomex cored everything, a few generations of hull design and some serious effort put into getting the mast and mainsail to work together might be a game changer. I think Matt has gone through quite a few re-cuts to get a sail to work properly with his carbon masts.

And yet, is he "Dominating" the class?

There are a few very good skipper's who dominate, no matter which boat they happen to be on that week (F18, F16, Acat) but there are no single boat designs that dominate any of those classes.

where are the beam bolts?

Well, it is not new for any developmet or formula class to see a design come out and take it to the next level.

The A Class took a leap in development from the Boyer boats to the Flyers. It now looks like there will be a simular leap from the the current boats to the DNA. Why has Ashby moved from the ASG3s which he builds to the DNA produced from a rival??? If one design makes a significant improvement in performance, then the other manufactures tend to update their designs.

F18

Tiger, then the Capricorn took it to a new level, Infusion refined some aspects of the Cap, then the C2 and WildCat came out further refining the Formula.

That's Formula / Development classes and the F16 class will not be immune from it. Weather this boat is the boat to take it to the next level, we can only wait and see, but at a quick glance it looks like it has the goods. Right now if I was looking at investing, then this boat would be the first I would look. I would love to see a min weigh pre preg nomex honeycome Viper.

And yes, the sailor will always make the biggest difference, but why put yourself on the back foot with a slower boat. Would Ashby win on a Mk 4 Boyer against Brewin on a DNA? Same applies to F16s.

Sorry the X16F is not class legal. Beams are glued on not bolted.

Apart from being slightly heavier than the Stealth which also has a fairly full compliment of Carbon accessories.. I cant see the Bim being a class killer.. I would also question if the Bim is in fact stiffer than the other platforms..

There is more to it than just all Carbon. Design plays a major roll as dose core material, lay up and curing technique. There are many Carbon A's on the market. The DNA is a different line of thinking re hull design, pre preg carbon nomex. The beams are also incorporated into the hulls, not just glued in.

I am sure you could order an X16F without the beams glued if desired (maybe extra $$$)

Development classes evolve. Even if current boats are all carbon they will be superseded by a faster design at some stage. If that bothers you, then don't play.

I don't think anyone that has posted here is indicating that they are at all bothered......

No, just a general comment not directed at anyone.

Do all agree though that faster designs will emerge, making older designs obsolete at the top level?

Only SMODS do not develop. Well not unless the SMOD builder decides to "evolve". That happens when they feel their bank balance needs a top up. Just ask the 49er boys about rig changes and other mods....

One designs develop.. Have a look at first few year 505 hull and a "modern" hull or in fact an original T vs a "Marstrom" T.....Ok not as much perhaps as an I14 or moth but their hulls change. So if you dont like development but like water sports.. Ummmmmmm try swimming Im assuming you don't include your own "evolution" of body drag form....

As for cores.. we can talk about history of cores if you wish.. Sailed a few times on "Jennifer Julian" and Colour7... But it all comes down to diminishing returns.. But tell me what was the core of Prime Computer? What was the standard core at that time?

older boats, older designs and older people both become "obsolete" at top level..

That statement should become a classic!

should have been older boats, older designs and older people all become "obsolete" at top level..

I'm old so my english skill is now showing how truly obsolete I really am...


On another advancement we have a carbon boat killer on the horizon.. FINALLY!!!!! even greater than SF potential.. Nanotube fibre!!

http://www.gizmag.com/new-nano-fibe...7dd3e0-UA-2235360-4&utm_medium=email

Not obselete... you just become a classic.

to quote someone I can't remember....

"Inside every old person is a young person wondering: what the *uck happened??"

Cheers

In the A Class, the Boyer boats are obselete at the top level....... But don't worry, it won't happen in the F16 class.



Well said lol

There is a difference between obsolete and out of style. Ultimately there is not much difference in top speed between any of the designs within a formula, the difference in many of the newer designs resides in the small refinement that makes some of them easier to drive at that top speed. Take a newly made (read still tight) MKIV made with a new rig, foils and the current layout and you would be hard pressed to see much if any significant performance gap.
The top guys in any class buy new regularly. It is a lot more fun to have a new design to play with when you do this than just a shinny version of the old – don’t you think?

Anyway you are never going to get rid of the guy who thinks he can just go purchase some more speed cause he can’t make his current equipment win.

At least us oldies read the posts correctly and will admit mistakes when we do make them.

Sorry Matt but I disagree strongly here as do the majority of A Class sailors. The difference between the MkIV Boyer and the Flyer when it first came out was significant. They are now saying it is a simular leap to the DNA. They became the must have boat because you needed it to compete at the pointy end.

Even the difference in the Multi Manufactuer OD class, Tornado the difference between the Reg White and the Marstroms were significant. I have done a fair bit of racing on the Reggies and Marstroms and can confirm they are chalk and cheese. Made me wonder why we tried to pursue for so long on a Reggie kitted out with all Marstom boards, beams, stick.

When the level of competition increases, the difference in equiptment becomes quiet noticeable.

Perhaps it does or doesn't make a difference, but the constant perceived need to update by the boys at the top does allow really good boats to be sold down the chain to the middle ranking sailors at a price they can afford. Car sales have been built on this model since car production first began.

For guys whose sailing skills are such that these boats then become very affordiable training platforms to hone there skills before committing lots of funds for the latest all singing and dancing toy.

But when they do beat the latest high tech gizmo,and they will on occassion, it makes the win seem even more significant.

mate even different factories, different gel coat colours and build days in SMOD classes have a following...

All I know is Micha H won the Tybee on a Tiger 2 years ago. The Infusion was already well refined by then. The formula rulebox works pretty well not to make any boat obsolete or any boat a lot better then others.

Nice design though and great to have another boat in the ballpark!

Steven,

If you think something is better then it likely is for you. The pointy end you refer to is not very deep though. I appologize in general for the offense but the A class tends to be Lemmings more than most. Look at the rush a year ago to all jump to the ASG3 and look how well that panned out for most. Not that the beam attachment on the DNA would not help the stiffness, but it's no game changer and the reviews I have heard have been somewhat mixed. The top guys are jumping on it and hence it will show well.

I have sailed the Tiger and and some of the newer designs like the infusion and Cap. Yes there is big difference in how they feel and sail. But the better sailor is still going to win. In my own shop, there is a huge difference in the Falcon over the Blade on the water. It feels smoother and easier to push, but does that win races or has it obsoleted anything. Its about the sailor.

Nobody wants to compete and have any inkling that their equipment may be holding them back. New designs in a formula box rule class will always be the standard. It just follows with so many of the other periferal factors. Boats do not lose races, people kill people or something like that.

shiiiiiiiiiiiiiit. My blade still has it going on. Amador and I literally traded spots alternately (he came out on top by one race) at the area D quals. It is clearly cause I am a superior sailor given his grade A ride.

seriously though, his boat is a work of art and I would love to get on it. And... my next boat will be a falcon. Just don't have the time to sail it to justify a new boat right now.

Is this comparison between the Falcon and Blade using the 2nd gerneration Blade built at Vectorworks? Or is it in reference to the 3rd generation Blade being built by Formula Catamarans in Australia?

From what I understand, the 3rd generation Blade's on the water performance has evolved far beyond that of the 2nd generation Blade. To avoid confusion, stating which incarnation is being talked about would help keep a better apple to apple comparison.

I guess my boat is the second generation Blade from VWM. The hulls are at least... but I don't think anything else was changed. All the F16s seem to use the same mast anyway.

Same extrusion doesn't mean the same mast.

yeah, true. has anyone really changed position of the spreaders in terms of height?

I'm about positive that Matt is doing it differently than AHPC.

I think AHPC is higher with the diamonds, but I don't know that for certain.

stealth doesnt.. There is a carbon rig on one blade platform in South Aussie

Yes, the A class guys can be a bit like Lemmings, however do you really think there is no significant difference between the MkIV Boyer and the Flyer?

As for the DNA, some of the best are convinced. Ashby so much that he got himself one despite his production of ASGs. What does that say. He does not want to be beaten by Brewin on a DNA. From what I have heard over here, the DNA guys are now trapping downwind. The platform has allowed them to do this in reasonable breeze where as it was too dangerous before hand.

There will always be those who jump towards the trend manufacture, however every now and then a manufacture will raise the bar a notch and others will have to follow suit or slide out the back door.

Many here keep rushing to “the sailor makes the biggest difference” which is true, but if you were investing, why would you put yourself at a disadvantage. Why should you have to sail better than the next guy to equal his performance.

New designs have and will come out, they will be quicker and over time. It may happen with gradual change or you may see a leap from one manufacturer. So really, how many people here disagree?

Where I sail a few of the lads were out on the wire down wind well before taking delivery of their new DNA's. The DNA's are a pretty sexy looking boat, particularly from behind, which of course is the view I mostly see

I am not claiming that there is not a significant difference in the 2 designs. And I would also rather be on the newer design than the older. If you had like age/condition boats and identical foils and rig though, the ultimate difference (across the whole range of conditions) would be such that normal mistakes and sailing errors for almost every sailor would outweigh the potential to drive the boat easier.

Downwind trapping is just a technique that was already being tried before the DNA much like the wild thing was years ago. The ability to do this easier is a result of the new revision in mast/Sail combo and has nothing to do with the DNA. The revised bend changes to some of the newer masts allows you to have a larger sail shape range, so you can be fuller with more power off wind but still be able to keep flat and in control up wind.

The ASG3 went radical from A class standards and has not been received well. Ashby has his hands full I imagine with the AC, so I would not consider his jump to a DNA anything other than convenience.

It’s the age old dilemma with formula/box classes. What you really are proposing is 1 design racing. Or, we all buy the newest design each year- which is what typically happens with a select group within each class. The F18 guys work overtime trying to tell the world they are all equal and the A class works hard to promote the designer and development. Both have strong level racing across the fleet. – why?

Hey it's back to the future Mossies made this development over 12 years ago, basicaly no difference to upwind speed, but much more power down wind. Improved speed around the course dramaticaly.

Correct, however it was not considered fast / too risky.



Whilst the new rigs will make an impact, the platform has played a part as well. Trapping downwind requires a reasonable about of breeze to make it beneficial. The old platforms were a bit hairy when the breeze picked up and sailors would shift to keeping the boat flat with both hulls in the water to keep the bows out. The DNA has quite a bit more volume and with the adjustable curved boards can be pushed much harder downwind in breeze i.e. trapping downwind.

Please note, I do not have firsthand experience with this, just what I have heard from A Class sailors.

Ashby's company builds the ASGs. When AHPC shifted boat production offshore, one of their boat builders moved over to build boats for Ashby. (Ashby started of as an AHPC sailmaker before going out on his own). It would not supprise me if Ashby bought the DNA to have a good look at it before bringing out the next ASG design. Nacra had a good look at the Capricorns and Tigers when designing the Infusion.

Very interesting to note design trends.
For years the A class has been pioneering multi hull design with things like the reverse bows and volume changes. There has always been a rather fast paced evolution in this class due to the constant model changes and development/experimentation inherent in the class. By comparison other classes used to be relatively stagnant.

This is not so much the case anymore. New models and development in the F18 and F16 etc are coming fast and furious. New hull designs, rig and sail evolution etc.

The A class who recently were following the narrow hull shapes lines are now adopting trends taken from the fat boy classes where faster, easier driven hulls are not skinny but fatter. Turnabout is fair as the reverse bows, flatter keels and low placed volume were trends proved in if not pioneered with the A’s.

All things very cool for the techno junkies and the guys looking for the newest things. Not so cool for costs. Development, new models, new tooling etc are expensive and costs of boats to race show this. People have always accepted this in the A class, but the old builder set up in the classes like the F18 and F16 are seeing/will see this too.

And what Matt just said is of utmost importance for a class with ambitions to grow large! If manufacturers dont make money the class will always be small.

Yet another reason for homebuilding

But to make money today in a world full of affluent purchasers, manufacturers constantly have to update their products to sell new product. People no longer sadly want things that last and are good at there designed use, but want visually exciting and disposiable items. Its simply what we have become used to I'm afraid.

But to mitigate this, tooling up for new designs is not as expensive as it once was, latest 3D cutting costs have plummetted and its not unusual to cut whole sections out of MDF, join them together and you have a male or female mould suitable for building and testing a new design. To be at the selling end I'm afraid that manufacturers are going to have to get used to constantly doing R & D and pushing out new models.

Have to agree with Matt on this one. I think the new techniques on the A are more attributable to the mast and sails.

Thrice bitten pointed out that this is how it works on the mossie. To my eye the new a rigs are stiffer sideways and heaps bendier fore and aft. Makes sense when you think about it. Wouldn't be easy to achieve on a wing mast. But I dont pretend to understand composites so maybe not.

It not just the guys on the DNAs trapping downwind.

Need to get me one of those bendy carbon sticks.

When I spoke to Glenn about a month ago he stated this was the plan.

Expect the next generation of A's from someone (whoever has the budget and facilities) to be built using two moulds. One for hull outsides and top surface of beams and the other being inner hulls and beam bottoms. Its all about stiffness and structural continuity

What would you but between the inside and outside, and what would the process be?

Why would this be "better" than a core with outside and inside laminates?


Very interesting stuff!

I don't think you're understanding. I'm talking port and stbd halves

Ahhhh..

"Anyway you are never going to get rid of the guy who thinks he can just go purchase some more speed cause he can’t make his current equipment win. "

And why, from a mfg. standpoint, is this a bad thing? It keeps builders in business, and supplies a steady stream of lightly used, newer models in the chain for those who don't have all the dough to spend on the sport, but still want a solid performer....