I see you can?t read Doug, ?Cougar it is not the technology that bothers some of us.?
What part of that statement do you not understand? As for moving it to the pub I don?t think so. I believe this is exactly where it belongs. Because your claims of your boats being the fastest things on the water are at the core of the moderation debate. All the other forums I?m involved in have moderators to keep manufactures from getting out of control, and using the forum as free advertising.
You say I have no experience with CBTF, Canting Keels, Spinnakers, and Hydrofoils, and you are correct. I say you don?t know the first thing about numerical modeling, because if you did you would make grandiose proclamations that you do. I say this because I have a B.S. in computational physics (i.e. numerical modeling).
So lets look at one of you claims about your F100 CBTF.
?The F100 final design is shown to be faster in every condition and by large and consistent margins -some approaching 500 seconds per mile!!! In light and heavy air! In Grahams own words:“Generaly the CBTF concept can provide a fast boat in the Open One Meter Class(F100) at all windspeeds and on all courses compared with a fixed keel version. The fixed keel version of the OOM(F100) is itself much faster than a standard International One Metre.”
Interestingly, Graham Bantock used the services of the Wolfson Unit for Marine Technology and Industrial Aerodynamics to refine the VPP’s capability with regard to the special issues regarding a CBTF model. The Wolfson Unit is the same organization many America’s Cup Syndicates consult with. ?
Now if I was a newbie who didn?t know anything about design that would sound very convincing to me, maybe even enough to buy one.
Since you don?t have an F100 in the water, this claim has to be based on the numerical modeling done by Graham. Graham uses WinDesign as his VPP. VPP?s are an ok design tool but are notoriously inaccurate.
One major flaw to consider is how the sails are modeled in WinDesign. It uses the model presented by Hazen in ?A model of sail Aerodynamics for Diverse Rig Types?. This model was published in 1980 and is very outdated. It neglects any sail area in the roach, and it neglects any aerodynamic interaction between the sails, not to mention it was not intended to be used on sails of this size.
The second major flaw in WinDesign, or any other commercially available VPP for that matter is the model used for hull drag calculations. For this the DSYHS (Delft Systematic Yacht Hull Series) model was used. First off only 39 test models where used to develop the empirical model. From a statistical error point of view 39 hulls is barely adequate enough to represent all the possible different hull forms. Secondly it?s not a continuous model. It has a low Fn formula and a high Fn formula. And again there is the scaling factor, it wasn?t designed for models.
Let?s look at some real world issues now. You love to say that because CBTF works on big boats like Pyewackett, Genuine Risk, and Mari Cha that it will work on models. I love the fact that you always leave out one very important fact. None of these boats race around the cans. I don?t know of a single full sized CBTF boat that does. Let?s not forget that racing around the cans means you don?t always get to chose when to tack.
I can thing of two full sized boats that used twin rudders like CBTF does that didn?t do so hot; Blackaller 1987 and the Swiss 2000.
So let?s review.
- there is large room for error in your numerical model,
- The technology is yet to be proven in round the can racing.
- Certain aspect of the technology has proven to be poor in round the can racing.
- No verifiable race results.
And you wonder why people give you a hard time about your posts.