REMINDER: THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that we deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
I've got a set of thruster fins. But I also have a board that was intended as a 2+1, but with the regular sized center fin (I think Ised a 6" bonzer fin) the board was too stiff, so I put in a thruster fin and it worked great. So actually one option I'm thinking about is a regular thruster center fin with small side bites.Just a comment to provoke design discussion and your thoughts on your rocker numbers which I am sure you pondered deeply - I would have thought your reasoning is perfect for twinzer, but less so for a thruster which likes a bit of extra tail rocker. Is it because you see it producing an easier transition in a quiver that still contains twinzers? Will it be flat bottommed - a point made by Simon Anderson and I think GG is the concaved boards do generally have more rocker.
One thought I have is that your shape as is might be suited to a thruster set up with smaller rear fin e.g. AM or even the Rob Machado "Robber" twin plus trailer template - quite a deep albeit skinny trailer. I actually have the Robber template and it did work well in a thruster that I had built a little stiff due to the way I placed the fins.
With regard to the rocker, even though it is less than a HPSB it still looks adequate to my eye, not too flat. The concave flattens it a bit to make it a wee bit more fishy. This was before I put in concave. Also in the doubles the rocker is accelerated by an 1/8". I might flatten the concave and flip the tail the last 3-4 inches to get rid of that "cupping" I was seeing at the tail end of the doubles.Just a comment to provoke design discussion and your thoughts on your rocker numbers which I am sure you pondered deeply - I would have thought your reasoning is perfect for twinzer, but less so for a thruster which likes a bit of extra tail rocker. Is it because you see it producing an easier transition in a quiver that still contains twinzers? Will it be flat bottommed - a point made by Simon Anderson and I think GG is the concaved boards do generally have more rocker.
One thought I have is that your shape as is might be suited to a thruster set up with smaller rear fin e.g. AM or even the Rob Machado "Robber" twin plus trailer template - quite a deep albeit skinny trailer. I actually have the Robber template and it did work well in a thruster that I had built a little stiff due to the way I placed the fins.
I found two blanks in my driveway years ago. I suspect afoaf. I'm guessing they are 1.5 or 1.7lb eps. It's fused pretty tight. Not worth using building insulation to save a few bucks IMHO.What density is your blank? I've tried with super light building insulation, but the beads just come off wherever and there is no substance to the material :/
I assume you put that here because I put it somewhere it didn't belong...no problem.Not to hijack the tread, but does anyone think we can turn this into a car-topper? I'm thinking stitch-and-glue hull and foilboard foils on either side with 5052 tubing amas (see this):
Edit: Like this, but a scaled version of the AC75 with foil board foils.
Hydrofoil Catamaran | Fulcrum Speedworks
A hydrofoil catamaran is an excellent option for someone looking for an exciting sailing experience. Visit Fulcrum Speedworks today for more information.www.fulcrumspeedworks.com
I put it here because we're locked in, I have some left-over glass and epoxy and was thinking about building another boat and you seem to know something about sailing. I don't know anything about boat design. The AC75 class is intended to trickle down to production boats:I assume you put that here because I put it somewhere it didn't belong...no problem.
There's no way you're going to make a small version of the AC with two articulating foil arms. Maybe you could just slap a couple foil board foils onto the bottom of another build and see what happens?
I can't figure out how the arms work. I assume they're raised by a cable attached to the spreader.Choosing a rotating wingmast and soft sails rather than a wingsail that needs to be craned on board each time the yacht races is pointed to as having more ‘trickledown’ potential for other areas of sailing. But the decision has also been taken because once these boats are foiling, the restrictions on speed come from either foil cavitation or aero drag, and designers believe that it will be easier to manipulate a soft wingsail to reduce drag.
I worked at Dencho Marine in Long Beach for 4 years out of high school and while in college (3 days a week during the school year, full time in the summer). Started as a sweeper (sweeping the shop), worked my way up to interior carpentry and finally building hull and deck moulds (lofting). Dennis Choate was also a great shaper (ghost shaper for Phil Edwards in the 60's).I put it here because we're locked in, I have some left-over glass and epoxy and was thinking about building another boat and you seem to know something about sailing. I don't know anything about boat design. The AC75 class is intended to trickle down to production boats:
I can't figure out how the arms work. I assume they're raised by a cable attached to the spreader.