You mention how "weight aloft is generally a bad idea", which is so often said about nearly every modification of the traditional bermudian rig. I was hoping I could get some input from several member here who could help me understand why that is such a big concern on a cruising multihull.
I full understand the issue on a monohull, which often heels at high angles, and is subject to a pendulum effect from weight up high. I am not seeing how it applies to a cruising multihull, which should never heel more than 5% and whose wide platform would seem immune to pendulum induced rocking. Certainly, one would not want to have hundreds of pounds high off the deck, but what difference would another 20 pounds (or even kgs) make?
- Gardner
On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 1:46 PM, taladorwood@yahoo.com.au [harryproa] <harryproa@yahoogroups.com.au> wrote:
There are some aspects of it that I really like. I especially like that they aren't over hyping it.
I like that the wing rotates around a fixed mast, that makes it very easy to rotate it. They can take advantage of a much larger wind angle in relation to the boat than a sail and still be very efficient. The fixed mast means they can attach a jib to increase the area and lift, especially for downwind.The adjustable camber means that they can get more lift from the same area than with a symmetrical wing and the wing has a larger AOA range.What I don't like is the complexity and potential weight of the system. It has to be 2 to 3 times heavier than a conventional sail (just in the extra sails and battens alone), weight aloft is generally a bad idea.I also don't like that the wing has to be controlled by a traveler and that the wing has the potential to stall, instantaneously doubling the drag and forces on the mast.Overall though, it looks very promising to me.
__._,_.___
Posted by: Gardner Pomper <gardner@networknow.org>
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a new topic | • | Messages in this topic (3) |
.