I compiled the questions concerning the Viper from this forum and forwarded them to AHPC. Here is Gregg's comments. The questions are listed and Gregg's answers follow each question. Some interesting reading (IMO). I just thought the questions deserved an answer .

Bob Klein
Taipan 262


Q: Now that they're in production, how much does the viper weigh?
A: The Viper weighs all up 125kg. This is with an alloy mast. The Viper is a much bigger boat than either the Taipan or the Blade. A sloop Taipan with spinnaker weighs in at about 110kg. At the Global Challenge the average weight of the Blades, sloop with spin was 118kg. The lightest was, I believe, 112kg.
--The Viper is designed to be 125kg with a crew weight of 120 – 140 kg. The hull buoyancy and shape is designed around this.
--The Viper is designed to carry the crew on trapeze with spinnaker. The Taipan and Blade struggle to do this in anything over moderate conditions.
--The Viper does not appear to suffer from the extra few kilos even in light winds as the hull buoyancy is designed to carry the weight. If the boat was underpowered either up wind or down wind then there would be a problem. The F16 has power to burn; it is more of a problem of being able to harness the power and in particular how hard the boat can be pushed down wind. The Viper can be pushed a lot harder than any other F16 currently available.

Q: I notice the spin trimming blocks on the hulls are well inboard. Must be running a much flatter spinnaker. Is this correct?
A: The spinnaker is a flatter than earlier Taipan spinnakers and is fractionally flatter than our F18 spinnakers. The spin blocks are on the inner gunwale, the same as on all F18’s and the Tornado. Sheeting to the side stay is simply too wide for best performance.

Q: Any inside scoop on how much help the extra hull volume offers in higher wind strengths?
A: The Viper has about 50% more hull volume of the Taipan and about 20% more than the Blade. Does it make a difference? - heaps

Q: Have all the "pieces" been optimized to the F16 (alluding to the F18 parts used at the GC that were intended to be re-made for F16)?
A: Yes, The list of optimized things where we have saved some weight since the 1st boat at the GC are;
--Hulls now 26kg (-4kg)
--Front beam assembly -1.3kg
--Centerboards -1.2kg each
--Rudders -.2kg each
--Mainsheet system. -.6 kg
---Total 12.7kg
This has reduced the weight from 137kg to 125kg

Q: Any delivery dates for US buyers?
A: First boat into the US will arrive early December.

Q: where are the spin sheets led? Is that the yellow line I take it? Why so inboard with the sheeting? (if those are them, but there are no other blocks around)
A: Spin sheets go to ratchet blocks on the inner gunwale - then to turning blocks on the front beam. The turning blocks are positioned so that the crew on trapeze at the back of the boat can easily sheet past the skippers head. It also gives more angle of the sheet around the ratchet blocks.

Q: I'm also curious about volume distribution along the length of the hulls. Hard to get a clear idea from the photos but it seems as if there might be comparatively more volume further aft compared to the Blade.
A: In fact the buoyancy distribution is possibly a little further forward than the Blade but I have not really compared them. The transom on the Viper is smaller than the Blade and helps considerably with the downwind performance of the Viper. With the little bit of racing that we have done with the Viper it is proving to be every bit as good as hoped.

Hope this helps,

Regards,
Greg

Greg Goodall
Managing Director
Australian High Performance Catamarans

There must be some correction on one answer. The average weight of the Blades measured during the Global Challenge is not 118 kg but 114.3 kg.

The lightest boat was carrying a carbon mast and weight 105.8 kg and the lightest one with alu mast was 109.8 kg.

All latest models Blades (2007) are around ( +/- 1 kg ) around 110 kg.

Regards,
Hans

I also believe John A was twin stringing down wind at the GC, how does the Viper compare to the Stealth F16 which must (I assume) have the best "manners" down hill with T fouls ?

Very interesting answers Bob. It would also be interesting to know (not that I expect you'd get this from Greg) how the 15kg difference between the Blade and Viper is distributed between hulls, beams etc. And it will be great if we can get both (or better, all) of the designs racing each other regularly. Really quite a step forward in the development of the class.

Interesting weight zone, it seems to be in no mans land, most blokes I know are with sailing trim around the 75 -85 kilos which then means that only your son or daughter is really optimum crew. With the extra bouyancy and modern hull design I guess its not really going to matter but I think as a single hander it maybe a bit porky in the lighter stuff, I guess one shouldn't make assumptions just yet

Good comment (especially since I'm feeling a little porky myself right now :-)). Does this suggest that the Blade may be a little better suited to a heavier crew, essentially trading some of the Viper's boat weight?

I suspect targeting that crew weight is intended to try to differentiate the boat clearly from the Capricorn rather than risk cannibalizing his existing market.

That seems counter intuitive as the Viper has so much more volume in the hulls. I'm also wondering is the Viper more difficult to right?

Personally I like the AHPC Viper F16. I would have written "really like" if it had been lighter.

Bob has send me some more pictures of the Viper and I will post these shortly.

I think it is a very clean looking boat and I think it has the right amount of bow height for very challenging conditions.

The thing that I don't like very much is how somebody consistantly misremembers some important specifications and averages. Hans has already responded to that, as have several others over the past year. I also don't appreciate it very much when Greg says that the Viper is a much bigger boat then the others, because it isn't. The Aussie Blade is the same size (volume) and that boat was measured at 111.7 kg if I remember correctly. And we must note that this Aussie Blade was a prototype as well ! That 137-112 = 25 kg wasn't therefor so much the result being "bigger" but more of different design choices.

When Greg wasn't looking we, the GC participants, had some fun with the electronic scales and various Viper components. Two daggerboards, 2 rudders and rudderstocks on the Viper were already 8+ kg heavier then the same package on the other boats. Certainly, the parts were said to be off the F18. But still.




Notice how this leads to the following situation :

boat weight + max crew = 125 + 140 kg = 265 kg

Were the other F16's will have :

110 + 155 kg = 265 kg

Basically what AHPC has done was to take out any excess weight of the Viper itself from the maximal competitive crew weight. The final overall weight remained the same.




Personally I believe both the Taipan and Blade struggle a whole lot more when you don't send the crew on the wire when sailing under spinnaker in challenging conditions. I found that having the crew sit next to the skipper puts to much weight forward on the boat.

It does appear however that the taller bows improve the downwind ride.





Well yes. That and the fact that the competitive crew weight range has been corrected to arrive back at the same overall weight. With that being exactly the same together with having exactly the same rig then yes, light wind performance would indeed be expected to be identical.





This is simply not true. Both the Stealth and the Aussie Blade has at least the same quality as the Viper, were I believe that the Stealth is still the undisputed winner with its T-foils.





Most of this volume is above the waterline and in a place where it can not be used effectively. This is because it is largely the result of having a taller hull all over and for example the additional volume between the beams will not be doing anything no matter how rought the conditions.

More important then overall volume is for example that the bows are taller.





It will be interesting to note here that the Blade hulls are now about 23 kg. The Taipan hulls were 23.5 kg. The home build Timber blade hulls come out at 25-26 kg. This shows that most of the difference in ready to sail weight (= 125-107 kg = 18 kg) is not coming from the hulls (total 6 kg) But from other components. Again this confirms the earlier claim that weight differences are not the reasult of the Viper "being bigger" but of having made different design choices.

The daggerboards at the GC were measured at 8.0 kg per pair exactly. With the savings as mentioned by Greg we now have 5.6 kg per pair. The pair of Stealth daggerboards were 3.6 kg, the 2007 VWM Blade pair are 3.8 kg, mine Taipan set is 4.1 kg and I seem to remember that the Aussie Blade pair was 4.8 kg. The latter was a prototype set and Marcus was adament that they would be lighter in the production version.

With respect to rudders. We measured them at just over 7 kg at the GC. With the weight savings we now have 6.6 kg. My own AHPC rudder setup (2 rudders and 2 carbon rudder stocks) weights in at 3.1 kg. It is true that the Viper uses aluminium rudders stocks and therefor we can't compare them directly to the my carbon stocks. Both rudder boards do use carbon cloth as stiffening however. Still, the European Blades are fitted with aluminiun stocks as well, made from bend alu tubes, and this are surprisingly light. I haven't measured them but when I held them I could not feel any difference in weight. I'm told that the stocks from bend alu tubing weight almost the same as the carbon stocks I have and it sure felt that way. I'm also certain that I would have noticed any difference over 0.5 kg, mostly because board+stock only weight 1.55 kg and then 0.5 kg different is quite alot.

I don't think the current run of F16 boards and rudders (stocks) are considered anything other but up to the job. So the added weight is not to prevent any breakages as none are occuring now. Looking just at the rudders (stocks) and daggerboards we see that already another 5 kg can be won.

I'm sure the beams themselves are combined at least 6-8 kg heavier as well. Maybe even more. That results in an extremely stiff platform but it does cost a bundle in the weight department.

And that shows my earlier point about making different design choices.


Now I reiterate that I really do like the Viper F16. And I agree with Greg that the performance difference between a 110 kg F16 and the 125 kg Viper F16 will not be much at all. Even Texel only predicts a 59 second difference after an hour of racing because of it (assume both are raced with 150 kg crews). When the Viper crew is 15 kg lighter then the other crew then the difference will be less still.

Personally I feel that the Viper F16 has everything done right except the overall weight. But that is still very acceptable. I do understand the reasons why AHPC choose the go this route, using the same beams for the F18 and the F16 is economically attractive. What I don't understand is their choice to have different boards and rudders for the F16 and then still have them at F18 weight. Again AHPC has been making much superior boards and rudders for nearly 20 years now, surely they can get the result they're after by being only 1 kg overweight instead of 3 kg ? With the lighter boards and rudders the Viper F16 will come out at 120 kg is just under it and then, indeed, it will become an attractive F16.

That is the way I feel about it.

Wouter

Wouter, did you know that the Viper from the GC is sitting at my club? (Muiderzand).
I've seen them take it out at least once, you could probably even take it for a spin if you asked real nicely.

I may just do that !

I will ask nicely of course, but I will not make any deals regarding my review.

They must accept that I will give my honest appreciation of it, where ever that may lead. That is paramount.

I do expect however to be positive about the Viper however. I've sailed some of the other F16's while heavily overweight (3 persons on boards or two heavy weights) and these boat never failed to surprise me about about how well they keep going. My record for the Taipan is 210 kg (crew), with my own homebuild F16 being 121.8 kg that puts my personal overall weight record at 330+ kg.

Thanks Tony,

Wouter

Thanks Wouter. This is exactly the kind of extra info I was hoping we might get.

[img]http://www.catsailor.com/bb_files/122373-Viper_F16_AHPC_spi_power%5B1%5D.JPG[/img]


[img]http://www.catsailor.com/bb_files/122373-Viper_F16_AHPC_spinn_pull_1%5B1%5D.JPG[/img]

I think we have a Viper coming our way. I'll keep you posted on the head to head. Of course, if Robbie Daniel is sailing it we know what the outcome is going to be.

My understanding is that the first USA Viper is heading to the gulf coast of Florida and will come with a carbon mast. It is reported to weigh 120 kg.

If I have this correct, emphasis has been placed on the rigidity of the Viper. Hence, the beams are central to this and will bring some extra weight. But I believe the logic is that the Viper will be a very stiff boat and the extra weight will not be a performance factor.

I am just relaying information that has been directed my way from AHPC. I am not an engineer.

Cheers
Bob

If I have it right, the boat is coming to GYC and will be sailed by a father/son team. I think it is replacing an N-17.

So will this open the pandora box of carbon sticks in the f16 group? I am limited on my knowledge of what is out there, but has anyone placed a carbon stick on an F16 platform yet? And since the blades and stealths seem to be around min weight already, if they do go carbon, where would you add the weight?

About 25% of all the F16's sailing in the world have a carbon mast. Mostly Stealths, but a few one-offs and now a few Blades are sporting them as well. They have been part of the F16 class from the very beginning.




Somewhere ! <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Part of it at the top of the mast to get at the minimal required F16 mast tip weight.

Wouter

My boat should be about on Minimum all up weight single handed(104kg), but I have carbon beams.

did any of the F16 at the GC have carbon sticks? Wondering how the ones with the carbon do against the noncarbon ones.
Is the viper coming only with carbon or is that an option?

I think 3 boats at the GC had carbon masts. They were all over the spectrum. The Viper comes standard with an alu mast, actually the same mast that the Blade has. Getting a carbon mast for the Viper is very much a custom order and I'm sure it took some pressure from the customer to get one.

Wouter

All I know is: That's a beautiful boat and AHPC has excellent quality in their builds of the Taipan line.

Generically speaking..... what do you guys think the average number of hulls/boats built before the bugs are worked out?

Too many boats, too few $$$$$$ ......

I have always wondered why the rear beam on my Snake was so small....they certainly fixed that problem.

Quote:

--The Viper is designed to be 125kg with a crew weight of 120 – 140 kg. The hull buoyancy and shape is designed around this.




Notice how this leads to the following situation :

boat weight + max crew = 125 + 140 kg = 265 kg

Were the other F16's will have :

110 + 155 kg = 265 kg

Basically what AHPC has done was to take out any excess weight of the Viper itself from the maximal competitive crew weight. The final overall weight remained the same.

Please note that the Aussie Blade was sailed by a man who weighs OVER 120kg as well - so the Aussie Blade would seem to NOT have any weight carrying problems?

The all up weight might be the same with a lighter crew on a viper, but the crew on the Viper can move less of it around so generating less RM and so less power and so less speed.

Yes, but RM is not important in lightwind which Greg was careful to focus on. So his statement is still basically correct.

Wouter

So are you saying that the ideal weight for na F16 is more than an F18???? Taipan 4.9s are best around 120 kg and I would imagine that the F16s would be better suited to about 120 to 130. Sure you can race at 155, I raced the F18 at 184 initialy before we trimmed right down to 160. However we are still just a little too heavy for the F18.

No, as the ideal weight for the F18 is centred around 150 kg with a span of 15 kg to either side.

F16 is centred around 140 kg with again a span of 15 kg to either side.

The two weight ranges overlap but the F16 range is not situated above or beyond that of the F18.


We must really not forget that the F16 rig has evolved beyond the Taipan rig and it requires 143 kg on two trapeze wires to hold it down when a 150 kg F18 crew holds down their boat. In the way of hull volume (and related drag) the F16 achieves F18 equivalence (F18 with a 150 kg crew) when it is sailed at an overall weight of 245 kg. Basically this means a 138 kg crew is the F16 is at minimum boat weight.


No I know that many people "feel" that this must be different, but then again 90% of the world simple "felt" that the world had to be flat 6 centuries ago. Feelings are often not very dependable.

Also we must not continue ignoring hard statistic data that directly disproves your "Taipan 4.9s are best around 120 kg" claim. It may be so that YOU "feel" that 120kg is optimal for the Taipan but this was not found to be the case in the scientific analysis produced by Elliot Tonkes. You can read that article here :

http://www.geocities.com/f16hpclass/F16HP_optimal_crew_weight_analysis.html

I should at this point probably also add that Jim Boyer and Daniel van Kerckhof were adament that sailing the Taipans as light as 120 kg (= crew) was not an advantage in their perception.

As this theme is recurring every couple of months I would like to lay this issue more broad then just as a reply to your post Stephen. As such the next comments may well not applying to you personally Stephen.

I found that far too many people simple look at the hull length of the the F16 and feel that they "understand" the boat in every aspect and "know" what it is like and what it likes. This may work surprisingly well for some of the 70's and 80's boats as build by Nacra and Hobie but with the Taipan and F16's you'll be deceived completely. As you would be with many other Australian designed catamarans.

The Taipan and F16's are simply on a different tangent from the basic catamaran design and fail to live up to such crude rules of thumb. Although there are also many people who apply the "maximum hulls speed rule" to cats so there is plenty of ignorance going around.

In the end of the day. The Taipan and F16's are much more powered up then their size suggests. With the new large squaretop sails (incl Taipans now) and spinnakers you want some body strength on board. Not plenty of it but still an ample amount. Being below 130 kg means you that start lacking in that area. Being 120 kg and less means that you ARE lacking in that area. I've sailed/raced often enough with 60 kg and lighter crews on my F16 to have learned that. As I'm 90 kg and sufficiently endowed I can then help out when needed. If I had been 60 kg skipper myself then well ...

Basically what I'm saying here is that every time we focus far to much on one single aspect. In this case we ONLY look at how a 120 kg crew is lighter then a 140 kg crew and concluded that they are therefor advantaged. But the real world is never as clear cut. Every advantage comes with a disadvantage. You pay for every achieved benefit by accepting a drawback. The real trick (performance) is in balancing the factors of the these groups. This is also why a crew weight somewhere in the middle of the competititve range has the best potential over all possible weights.

Many believe that competitive crew weight ranges run from the lightest crew being maximally favoured to the heaviest crew being maximally disadvantaged, but this is simply not the case.

A real life competitive range runs from light to heavy crews in a dome shaped arc with its peak somewhere in the centre. The crews at the extremes being more or less equally disadvantaged. Most likely being so in different conditions, but over the whole still equally disadvantaged. A scala of factor causes this result and crew weight is only one factor out of several. Interestingly enough crew weight can actually work out in both direction, advantagious and disadvantagious, depending on the conditions. And even there it is not as simple as light wind favours light weight and heavy wind favours heavy crews. For example, heavy crews in light winds but heavy chop can be advantaged again as the boat has more momentum to punch the waves. In heavy winds and large waves the light crews are able to catch the wave easier then a heavier and get a speed boost that way.

Basically, things are never as simple as many rules of thumb suggest they are. And yes F16's do have an optimal crew weight range that many feel is almost the same as the range for the F18's. It is my personal opinion that far more people underestimate the optimal crew weight for the F18. Certainly in the USA they do. Many of these boats are not featuring 10:1 mainsheet tackle systems for nothing. Now I can work my 7:1 F16 mainsheet singlehanded during a 3 hour distance race (with intermitted cleating), when I had to do so on a nacra F18 with a 9:1 tackle system in the same conditions, I had to use both hands and was worn down afterwards (again despite intermittend cleating). And this is one of the most often quoted reasons why crews below 135 kg really don't race the F18 very hard in anything over 12 knots. Same with respect to women. It is a body work-out. Very light weight crews (below 120 kg) on the F16 will experience similar drawbacks. Of course there are always some exceptions but these don't not really disprove the general trend.

Wouter

Agreed, but at that point a team at 130kg sailing a F16 down to weight will be carring 18 kg less around the course sailing a Viper.

Carrying 18kg extra around the course (same crew sailing a boat at 125 kg vs 107 down to weight boat) cannot be good for speed !

[

Just to be clear, I think you meant "will be carrying 18kg less around the course than sailing a Viper. For a moment when I first read that sentence I took the opposite meaning.

And I didn't really understand Wouter's comment that Greg was focusing on light wind. I thought the real focus was downwind in heavy air.

Guys,

Good discussion here but I want to point out something to lurkers and other folks reading about F16s and wondering about the class:

The F16 class offer a tremendous range of flexibility in terms of being competitive at different crew weights. Probably as much flexibility as the F18 and A-class and way more flexibility than virtually any of the one design classes. Let's not lose sight of this as we count grams!!! I sailed head to head, bow to bow with a fellow F16 who weighs 40 lbs less than I.

Stealth has had a carbon stick for years.

Eric,
Like you said Stealth have had carbon masts for years, in fact they come standard, and I believe have come standard with carbon masts since the beginning.
John P's price on carbon masts is really very good.

Regards,
Phill

Carbon mast is Standard on all the (current) Stealth range.

Never had a carbon mast before and I have to say I'd find it difficult to go back to Alu now.

It's better in the light stuff and it's also better in the big stuff. Win-Win !

I asked Matt about carbon Blade masts last week. He said an A cat mast (longer than F16) weighs about 20lbs. while the alum. Blade mast weighs about 38lbs. So certainly, we would all love to drop that extra 18 lbs. on the stick. BUT...the F16 class has a "tip weight" rule that would off set the lighter carbon mast benefits. ALSO, Matt said that at today's carbon prices, a new carbon Blade mast, fully rigged and ready to step, would cost pretty near $5,000!

Now, I'm all in favor of a lighter mast, and I've had two cats with carbon masts, never had a problem, never even seen one break, but for $5,000, I'm not sure that's the direction I want to go right now. New sails would be much less and I could spend the rest of the money for hotels at regattas! <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

How about importing stealth masts? I do believe the stealths are offered at a very good competitive price and include carbon mast. That would be an option.

I wonder how much it will cost to ship a mast from the UK to central FL?

My mast is slightly lighter than the A class wing masts foot for foot simply because there is less cloth in it as it is oval instead of a proper wing as per the A's.. It does require a little corrector weight, but not much.

As for the mast price of about 5000USD (2.5K GBP) is about right for the A class section, you pay your money, you take your choice, A carbon mast is sooooo much better (as I said before) and it allows a lighter person to sail the boat (single handed) as theu can right the boat (Class rules require this).





Talk to John P; I'me sure he would do an order of (say 10) as a job lot to send to the USA.

This is quite an interesting point. My Carbon mast had a tip weight of 5.25kgs. Therefore, I added 750grams of lead to measure prior to racing at the Global Challenge. I heard that Hans's Carbon masts had a tip weight of exactly 6kgs. The Stealths center boards were also lighter than Hans's and yet the Blade had an all up weight of under 104kgs and the Stealths was 112kgs. How come Hans's Blade appears to be lighter than most other Blades and approx 4kgs per hull lighter than the Stealth's?
As for carrying crew weight singlehanded the Global challenge proved that F16's have an enormous competitive range anything from 73kgs (Me, Stealth) to over 120kgs (Marcus, Aus Blade). Although, the winner (Hans, VWM Blade) was 90kgs.

Mark,

It must be down to contruction techniques and/or less cloth and resin and/or lighter beams.

1, Lighter beams (any idea how much yours weight ?)
2, Less cloth in the hulls (so possibly less strength or hull longeivity)
3, Less surface area of the hulls (so less cloth, resin and foam)
4, Lighter layup (Are the blades Autoclaved ?)
5, Wet layup vs pre-preg (I think wet can be done lighter with the appropiate skill level)
etc...

pre-preg should be lighter..

Mark my carbon mast was not at the exact weight, i had to add also a corrector weight in the top of 600 grams to meet the required tip weight.
My total boat weight was 105,8 kg but i had to add a corrector weight in total of 6,2 kg incl 600 grams of te mast.
My boat weight 105,8 - 6,2 kg = 99,6 kg originaly as a one up. This was measured after sailing almost year so the boat sucked up some water. When the boat was just finished in the workshop the boat weighted 97,8 kg. The point that i also used a carbon spinpole and some other carbon parts like tiller this will reduce the weight ofcourse. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

Regards,
Hans

Really ! lean something new every day !

I just assumed (always a bad move) that because (it appears) easier to use it would not be lighter.

You are not going to safe 18 lbs when going from an Alu F16 mast to an carbon F16 mast. The masts made by stealth marine and other for the F16 have a tip weight when rigged of at least 5.25 kg and that is before any tip weight is added. This is in line with the carbon mast weighting overall at mimimum 11.5 kg (25 lbs). This was by the way the lightest F16 mast weighted, several others were much closer to the required min 6 kg tipweight. It was also a pure singlehanding mast, if I remember correctly.

38 lbs for the Alu superwing sounds about right, but this surely included the proctor spreader arms and a mainsail halyard, spi halyard and spi gate. Of course the A-cat mast at 20 lbs doesn't have any of that. So we must add that as well before subtracting the two numbers and finding out what kind of weight can be saved overall. I also hear some Blade F16 sailors are sailing with stock 6 mm dyneema as spi halyard that is far too much as well. 4 mm is enough, even for bare hands. But I'm getting of track her.

Basically the maximal weight savings that can be had are limited to 5 kg = 11 lbs when all is said and done. Not 18 lbs = 8 kg. The tip weight often limits this a little bit more.

I don't think 5000 USD is a realistic price for an F16 carbon mast. Truth be told, when I inquired about having an alu mast replaced by a carbon blank the quote I got resulted in 1500 Euro price difference. Even at todays exchange rate that would only put the price ex shipping at 2200 USD. That leaves a very big chunk of budget for shipping. Stealth Marines quote was even less. At the time I still opted for the alu mast though, because as you know I like aluminium !

Wouter

Mostly because all the other VWM Blades were sailed doublehanded and had more gear on board. Hans also sails with a few modifications like dyform rigging, carbon boom and carbon spi pole, I believe. The remainder is caused by the weight difference between the carbon and alu masts. Hans boat is a 2007 VWM Blade and the others of the some production series were around 110 kg in 2-up. Basically this means a 6 kg difference in weight. Not too unrealistic with a carbon mast, absolutely no jib gear and some small mods here and there.

But like you I don't really understand why there was a similar difference between your Stealth and Hans Blade. Afterall, your boat is a fully optimized singlehander as well with carbon boom etc. There shouldn't have been 8 kg difference there.

Wouter

I am not too familuar with the with the Blade or Stealth, however have raced the Taipan 4.9s and also F16s including in perhaps the first F16 event in the world.... Before the prototype Blade even came out of a mold.

I have raced the Taipan at 160 kg down to to 130 and wilst we performed ok at the upper end of the weight range, the lower end was a BIG advantage, particlularly downwind. We have as you may know, a very competitive Taipan fleet in Oz. The quickest 4.9s getting are those with the light weight, very talented youth on board with a few light weight old salts. It has more to do with the hull design and its displacement, then the power of the rig. There comes a point where it is displacing too much and you will be best served with less weight and power.

I do not dispute the fact that the Viper is in no mans territory as far as the weight goes. The Viper looks like a quick boat and shold be competitve based on the rig development that will go into it and the hull development which trickled down from the Capricorn, however would be better served at min weight. This will require the use of exotics, something Greg is trying to stear away from, and will drive the price of the boat up. The question is will people fork out the extra $$$$ for the reduction in weight. I am sure this is something Greg has thought long and hard about before putting the boat into production. I personaly don't think he has made the right decision, but time will tell.

It is no secret that I have now got my boat on the market and plan to get an F16. The Blade looks good, the Viper would be tempting if it was lighter, however it looks like I may pick up a 4.9 and have a tinker with it.

Got told an interesting thing at the club on Sunday.

For 2-ups:
Blade on texel is 102
Taipan 4.9 (with the original Australian sailplan and the additional of F16-sized spi) is 103
Viper is 104. (using weight of 125kg)

Now at an F16 event, handicaps get thrown out the window and it is first across the line for the 2-ups. But food for thought if at a club event.

As for the Viper TA, it is a mini Capricorn. Exact same set-up with the ropes/systems and all that. Main diff is that it doesn't have those cutouts at the stern on the bottom of the hull, but does have the corner at the top cutoff to help with trapezing with the kite up.

Will take one out for a sail at the end of Nov once the NE monsoon kicks-in to see how it performs. Hopefully the Blade will be back in action by then, and a few of the Taipans will come out as a direct comparion between the 3 designs.

I am a bit surprised about the fact that everybody is talking the exotic materials. The hulls from the boat i sailed are normal standard build hulls with no exotics like carbon in it. The boat of Geert ( 109,7 kg 2007 Blade ) is a normal glass material build boat with alu mast, so this boat is only 2,7 kg above minimum weight ( 2 up ).
The Aussie Blade is build with Kevlar with an Alu mast and weighted 111 kg , but this was the first boat from the mould, so the builders did a great job because everybody knows the first boat is always a bit heavier then further on in the production process.

Regards,
Hans

Hi Steve,

not wanting to talk to personaly about peoples weight, but I think Willy and Petra are fastest sloop Taipan? I don't think they are the lightest and would have guessed they are above the weight you are suggesting is optimal?

In my experience the quality of crew is more important than the weight within reason. I would be happy to sail a F16 20 kg heavier if the crew is better.

Regards Gary.

ditto, 20kg can easily be made up for with a gun crew.

A few points but my info is a few years old now so things may have changed in the epoxy industry I don't know about..


One can use pre-preg uni directional "film" rather than a weave.
The crimping in the weave decreases the carbon strength slightly. So 2 x 100 gm layers of pre-preg will be stronger than 1 x 200 gm weave..

Next is amount of epoxy in the final layup. A good pre-preg will come out around the 40s% epoxy. Straight from the fridge.. A really good laminater will find it hard to get below 60%. Of course one could vac bag and bled the excess epoxy which one could see a 10-15% decrease in epoxy.. This is also true for wet lay build.. Reducing the final epoxy to 30-35% in a pre-preg..
Finally the epoxy in pre-preg is a "stronger" glue than can be easily found in "mix your own" shops.. BUT prepregs require minor cooking (60-100 degrees C) to firstly cure and secondly post cure (80-120).. However wet layups do benefit from cooking and post cure cooking as well.. (gains depends on the brand of epoxy).. Around 60C wet lay-ups starts to get soft.. Sounds like a high temp until you have a black boat sitting in a strong sunny day.. The old wet-layup tubes used on moths were hand deformable after a few hours on the beach..

At the end of the day we are talking minor amounts of weight gain and structural strength.. Its an issue with ultra boats like open 18teens but not an issue with F16s.. There are lots of ways one can decrease the hull weights if one wanted to.. All depends on time and energy one has to expend..
Remembering that vinyl-glass-foam-gel coat "A cats" hit the minimum weight for the class..

hope that helps..
<img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

welll... until you remember F16 is a class..
So the F16 should have a single handicap.. The T4.9 isn't 4.9 class regs last I looked.. So isn't a T4.9 its a F16.. Thus at a club event the boats should be registered and handicapped as a F16..

What we are seeing is evolution of the class.. With the older boats (like in any class) slowly becoming superseded by newer boats.. This happens in SMODs as well.. So not really a surprise..


<img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

If they would have built it off the Taipan platform (not unlike the Blade) then they would have been right on weight and absolutely no exotic parts would have been necessary (i.e. carbon mast etc.) and they would be selling like hotcakes… <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

hmmm.. maybe.. I don't think the T4.9 Association, knowing their overall response to the F16, that they would like to see that..

Here's a photo of my 18kg Top Gun Crew and hopefully future F16 World Champ <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Brilliant Mark !

Any objections if this photograph find its way in the "Best of the best" F16 gallery ?

Wouter

Very good points Hans.

And of course all the named boats, including your own, use aluminium beams as well.

I think the decision by AHPC to go for a higher ready to sail weight doesn't have that much to do with the cost of exotic materials at all. But rather that the quality control processes need to be well implemented at the factory if you want to get down to weight using the plain stuff like alu, glass and vinyl resins. This may be a tough job in a place like Thailand or Indonesia.

Wouter

Actually if there is a surprise to be found in all of this then it is in the fact how well the Taipans are hanging on. They may well not be the best F16 out there anymore but they sure as hell are to be taking into account. They are still coming out on top every now and then.

Wouter

Stephen,

There is a core of truth to your comments especially when looking at the Taipans, but other factors and other designs have reversed the trend. Although, the weight analysis by Elliot Tonkes still doesn't support any claims of superior crew weights below 135 kg. That is what statics tell us when taking into account a good number of race results.

Also I do agree that the Taipan hulls do get pressed in too far at a certain crew weight. I'm suprised at how much speed can still be coached out of them but it does get harder. The newer hulls are simply alot more bouyant and are also alot less sensitive to crew weight. But one of the biggest factors I found was that truly lightweight crews start lacking body power to really stamp the boat on its tail so to say. Crews that are bit more beefy tend to cover this aspect better and sufficiently so to be more performant overall. Truly 135-140 kg is where it is at, I'm really not pulling your leg here.

With respect to the Viper, I think AHPC will eventually have to lower its weight if it wants to make a play at getting the serious crews to buy Vipers instead of only the serious recreational racers and sailors.




That is mighty big of you to not have let my abuse sour you on the F16 idea. Having a modified Taipan myself I feel that "tinkering" about with a Taipan may not be a bad idea. Just stay below 145 kg combined if you really want to race it competitively. Go for the modern hullshapes if you are above that. If you are mostly looking at singlehanding then the Taipan is a very good F16 performer below 10 knots of wind, especially in the really light winds. If you regulary get more or get serious chop then the modern hullshapes will allow you the trapeze under spinnaker and bring a bigger smile to your face. The Aussie Blade is right on the mark in the way of hull design. That is my experience so far.

Welcome to the club and please accept my appologies for all the times I did you wrong. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Wouter

I don't know - I actually put that suggestion about the factory to Greg in an email a while back and he was very clear that that was not the issue at all. You've pointed out elsewhere yourself that the hulls are only 3kg more than the Blade and clearly there has to be a hit for the extra volume.

The reply Bob got also highlighted the significance of the target crew weight in the overall design. If it's true that this is part of the justification for greater volume, I think he may be more concerned about putting some market separation between the Viper and the Capricorn.

Quote (Here's a photo of my 18kg Top Gun Crew and hopefully future F16 World Champ)

Well the "little" skipper looks competent, BUT that big hulking "crew" seems a little less so?

Yep, waiting for someone to bring up Willy and Petra. They would be outside the ideal weight range but Willy is a very exceptional sailor. He recently placed I believe 7th at the last F18 worlds (first non pro) with Steve Brewin, raced with Ashby on the F18s to an Oz title win and campaign with Ashby it the Tornadoes before Ashby hooked back up with Bundy. He is in another league to most off the others sailing in the class at present and the extra Kgs they are carring are off set by his skill level...... However skill level has nothing to do with optimum weight. Skill level should be taken as being equal when looking at a boats competitive weight.

Bundy and Ashby would beat us around the cans if they were 180 kg and we were 150.... However they would beat us by more if they were 150 kg also.

The new designs are more boyant as the Capricorn and Infusion are to the Tiger. Both the Cap and Nacra carry weight better than the Tiger, however ideal weight is still 150 for each. This would have a lot to do with the crew weight equalising system the class has in place, however I would not imagine the ideal weight between the Tiger and the modern F18s was to much beyond 5 to 10 kg.

As for crews with the strength to handle, a fit 60 to 70 kg crew should handle the tiny F16 spin without a problem. One of my Tornado / F18 crews tipped the scales at 60kg and had more than enough strength to handle the T kite. I am talking about peak athletes which will get the most out of the boat, not a kid you pick up off the beach.

I would like to see that. The package looks very good but the weight is a ?....... If you did build the same boat at min weight, there is no doupt it will be superior to the 125 kg unit.


Plan is to hang up the Tornado / F18 boots for a while and teach my Girlfriend how to sail (she currently windsurfs). She is also currently studying for her masters along side her full time job, so I am kicked out of the house often to go sailing &#61514; This is where the F16 concept becomes very handy...... one up with kite.
Brent my crew is in a simular situation and is looking at going down the same track.

Yep, that is pretty comparable to how most of us get started on F16's.

Singlehanding an F16 is a ride you will appreciate !

And remember, no F16 sailor can claim mastery of the F16 1-up concept unless he (or she) can consistantly spinnaker it while trapezing ! That is the true "show of force" for 1-up F16 sailing !

Gary is the first to achieve this.

It will take everybody else a while to get there !

Good luck and best of enjoyement.

Wouter

Don't think so, the Stealth owners and the FX1's at Datchet have been doing it since 2001 <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

And this Stealth owner has been doing it since he had one (nearly a year now) and doing it with his Inter 17 for 6 years before that !

LOL, Wouter when are you going trap out with spinnaker up?

All of us FL boys have been doing it since Gary started posting his pictures online. I dont trap out downwind while bouy racing, but any other time I can, I am out there.

I had to do it last week when I got a good puff and ran a little too deep going to the finish line. I had the choice of either dropping the spin and reaching up to the finish line, or get out on the wire to cary the spin higher in the gust, which I did, and it was no big deal. It will allow you to sail higher with the spin up.

Usually I stay in on the tramp to fly a hull and run deep, but if you have become overstood and need to get back up high to the mark, do it!

When Paul, Anne and I did some two boat training under the supervision of John Pierce prior to the Global Challenge it was quicker for me (single handed) not to trapeze downwind. The wind was was around a force 4 and the sea state went from flat to a two foot swell further out in the Bay (Mumbles) On every run Anne would be trapezing and I experimented. My biggest gain was when I wasn't trapezing and flying the windward hull pretty high. The angle of the leeward hull compared to the sea gave a lot of lift to the bow and it also slid across the water really smoothly when I had to bear away in some of the gusts. I think all parties involved were quite surprised at the results. When I tried trapezing there wasn't that great a difference in speed but I was going lower. However, Paul and Anne took lumps out of me on the Gybe and when we started ploughing into the swell I was really struggling to stay in control of the boat and my actions until eventually I went for a closer look at the leach of the main.
This two boat tunning certainly proved to me that although flying a kite from the trap looks cool single handed, when it's blowing around a force 3.5 to 4 it is quicker and sometimes safer to sit in, get a hull flying HIGH (between 3'-4'or 900-1200mm off the water) and keep it there.
P.S I would also have to agree with Wayne. If anybody deserves the 'T' shirt for being the first person to kick butt single handed on an F16 then Aaron Young would get my vote. He was trapezing downwind whilst Altered was still an 'A'

Pictures guys !

Or it didn't happen ! <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />


Wouter

OK just to show how good Arun was out on the wire whilst with the Spinnaker up have a look at the Stealth promo http://www.formula16.org/videos/Stealth_F16_promo_video_01.wmv where he is helming out on the wire and his crew is down doing the wild thingy.

Even the main man John P is very good at such antics and it is a shame he doesn't attend these races as a competitor as he is leaps and bounds ahead of most of GB sailors ( I guess that comes from doing an olympic campaign on a Tornado )and we could all learn a lot from him ( yes you can get personal tuition from him )

Cheers, trapping handling the kite is something that isn't new to me..... may be not an f16, but the F18 and Tornado. My GF and I sail the F18 at 130kg currently, hence the desire to change.

Just to be clear.

We are talking about racing singlehanded and then trapezing under spinnaker.

We've all done the 2-up spi trapping thing plenty of times and it simply doesn't compare to handling everything by your lonesome.

Wouter

I think Wouter meant, trap with the kite, alone. Still, we know it's been done for years, even Uni. But he has a point about the pictures... <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />

Yep, Aaron was always very quick to get out on the wire 1-up, and very quick full stop.



Does my avatar count? Or this:

http://www.formula16.org/component/optio...;g2_itemId=2637

Or this:

http://www.formula16.org/component/optio...;g2_itemId=2674

? There's another hundred or so where that came from...

Paul

Were you racing there ?

Wouter

Clear and understand. It is not a unique thing to the F16 class or Gary. Many people (including myself)have done it on Tornadoes and F18s, it is just not class legal.

Sorry, I didn't realise the photos had to be taken during racing. This is a silly game.

My racing photos are very limited because it's rare for the photographers to sit anywhere apart from just above the windward mark.

I'll make sure that I take the video camera next time I race 1-up, so you can have some stills off that...

Paul

Gee, Farmoor Reservoir looks a lot more interesting than it did when I used to sail there <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/ooo.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

The Viper looks great!

What is pricing and availability for the states going to be like?

It looks like although there is a lot of comotion going on about the F16's on the web but, it looks to be pretty locallized to just certain areas. I'm not looking to start a whole movement in my area for a new class. I just don't care for the F18 and F17's that are popular (to big and I believe that they are going to be more $$$ than a comparable F16) and I just don't like H16's.

I believe Fun in the Sun can help you out with Viper availability - funinthesun@juno.com

Also see - http://www.catsailor.com/cgi-bin/ad-eagle/remote.pl?rtn=Global_Ads;cb=14

Thanks! I sent an email to funinthesun.

The link was just to a pop up window but, sadly didn't go anywhere.

Yeah that was their banner ad that Rick has here on the site. In situ it actually links to here - http://www.redgearracing.com/, though I doubt you'll find that any more enlightening.