FOILS = COOL!
I'm a big fan of foiling, particularly the way the Windrider
company has done it with their Rave trimaran.
A foil on each ama with trailing edges that determine up and
downlift, and a foil at the bottom of the rudder. The trailing
edges of the ama foils are governed by comma-shaped wands that drag
in the water. As an ama goes lower, the wand drags deeper, angling
the trailing edge down, increasing uplift. As the ama goes higher,
the wand drags less, leveling the trailing edge out, and eventually
creating downlift.
http://www.sailingbreezes.com/Sailing_Breezes_Current/Advertisers/Rave/rave_redefining.htm
(see the Foil Systemsection)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRTBYyNsmic
(see video at 1:40 - 1:55 and at 3:30)
Just about as simple as it gets, and at well under $10,000 for a
used boat, amazingly cheap.
I was inches away from getting a Rave when I decided to get an
overgrown beach cat instead, for three reasons:
- The Rave only lets me take one other person out.
- I live in Maine, and there are lobster pot warps and buoys
/everywhere/ in the warm weather (catching those at 20 knots would
be ugly).
- We've got a lot of rock shoals in our area, requiring a bit
too much attention at foiling speeds.
But if I didn't want to be able to take a few folks out with me,
and lived somewhere else, that Rave would have been mine. It would
have saved me a lot of money, too.
Would I consider a larger foiling craft if I lived in a location
where the coast is basically a long line made of sand, without
lobster traps? Probably not. I'd probably grab a used Rave for
fast fun and then have a "slower" (15 - 20 knot) multihull for
general use.
But that's just me. I'm ultra-cautious, and try hard to avoid
anything that could go wrong and ruin my day (or worse).
Right now the harryproa has bascially a single point of bigtime
failure: the mast. Fortunately that's easy to design for, it's not
dependent upon any small pieces of hardware, and even if it does go
wrong, the mast is to leeward, so a failure there is not likely to
induce injury or death.
I'd have a tough time going cruising with a series of foils that
add several more points of failure. Catching a single foil on a
log, shoal, or even a big plastic bag, could result in some foils up
and some foils down, which could get ugly at speed.
That said, I'd love to see it done on a 30' - 50' scale that
doesn't involve millions of dollars. A boat like that would be
great to watch, and to sail, even if I weren't going to get one
myself.
FOILS + HARRYPROA = ?
I'm not sure the proa is an ideal platform for foiling.
Challenges with a foiling Harryproa:
- Foils would have to work in two directions. Getting a
single-direction foil working is a challenge, but bidirectional?
That's a tall order. You might be able to do kick-up rudder foils
instead of just kick-up rudders, and then rotate them 180 degrees
for each shunt, designing them to handle the loads would be
interesting. Plus there's still the windward hull. Two foils
there, lifting one and dropping the other for each shunt? And if
you don't do rudder foils, four foils on the leeward hull, with two
down and two up on each shunt? That's a lot of work, cost, and
weight.
- Double-ended design is non-optimal. The proas are already
challenged, when compared to cats and tris, when looking at their
weight distribution and CLR. For a cat or tri, just put the mast
where you want it relative to the foils, make sure there's more
weight in back than in front for level trim, and you're good. For a
proa you're going to be slightly unbalanced, and that's going to be
much more noticeable on foils.
- Weight and cost. A series of foils, plus the structure needed
for them, is going to add weight and expense. If you really want
foils, perhaps that's fine. But it just goes against the
smaller/simpler/lighter/faster/cheaper design ethos behind the
harryproas. You could probably make it happen, but might end up
spending and weighing more than if you used a single-ended
multihull.
It seems to me that you might be happier with a trimaran,
hopefully with an unstayed rig, than proa. Or perhaps a biplane
catamaran with twin unstayed rigs.
Both are tried-and-true platforms for foils, there are no worries
about double-ended weight distribution and sailing loads, and the
foils wouldn't have to handle working in two directions. You'd also
potentially be able to gybe on the foils without touching down.
- Mike
lucjdekeyser@telenet.be
[harryproa] wrote, on 10/23/2014 5:07 AM:
Thank you, David, for your exposé. Please note that my interest
in foils is not racing but cruising, thus, not to gain speed but
to gain comfort in waves. If safe foiling would mean going
slower in heavier seas that is a price I would be willing to
pay. Going proa is for the same reason: a longer lw hull is
better in motion. So I was thinking that a long lw hull would
still be necessary in seastates that would surpass the capacity
of the foils. This probably also means that the flight height
would not need to be so high as to prevent the potentially
dangerous speed bumps of all but the most freeky waves as in
racing. Any catastrophic fail would be essentially an uneventful
low height fall. In any case, the operational MTF (mean time
between failures) of a foil will be worse than for the hulls,
but not much worse than for the currently proposed
rudder/boards.
At least in theory ;-)