ehh, could even any other forum threaten Catsailor ?

I mean being the sailing website with the most hits per year anyway ?

Wouter

Can you elaborate? (Not a question you get asked very often )



I'm sure I read somewhere that Vectorworks were planning a Blade 20. Anyone know if this is a Brander design?

Mark.

Hi Wouter!
What other race results where you refering to when you say that M20 is not a fast design? The M20 will perform well around the buoys, that's what it is designed to do!

Round Texel is the worlds biggest catrace, but it is not the best race to compare different designs in. When ISAF tested new catamarans did they do it in a distance race around an island? No, they had a normal race course, and the M20 performed well.

If the hull design is so critical, why is Hobie Tiger still the fastest F18?

/hakan

Speed is al about optimizing the important ratio's. Get one of these wrong and you'll suffer. On of these ratios is the wave-making drag to wetted surface drag. You can decrease wave-making drag enourmously by going for very long and very slender hulls BUT only at the expense of increasing wetted surface drag. Same thing happens in reverse. You can really cut down on wetted surface drag by opting for shorter hulls but only at the expense of increasing wave-making drag. Now if you put this in a graph you end up with a bucket. The trick is to find the ratio were you are at the absolutely bottom of the bucket for a projected maximum speed.

Most people just think that if you go for longer hulls that the hull related drag at top speed will reduce. This is not always the case. Personally I think the M20 has become to light for it hull length to be at an optimal ratio.





Vectorworks Marine was working on an ultimate 20 foot distance race design that was called the V20. A few pictures of the hull shape exist and it is not a Brander design. It also does not resemble the Brander designs closely. I know Phill wants to make boat designing a full time occupation so I'm sure he can be tempted into designing a Blade 20. Or whatever the optimal distance race boat will have as hull length. A deeper research into the ratio's will determine this. To let you in on a little secret I know he has been thinking about doing it. But a financier needs to present himself. With the Blade F16 and Blade F18 investments the war chest has been emptied.

It just occured to me how often I know all the answers to these questions. It looks more and more like I'm becoming Phills public agent. Humm, I think that would consider that as an honoury position.

Wouter

You know what ?

I typed up an extremely long post explaining it all and I deleted it.

I'm not going to make you guys wiser than you are. Besides I don't think you will learn of it. To many choose to rather believe in fantasies and worship a brand name like Marstrom.

Maybe if this theory is developped further we can make some money off it. It seems the first 2 tries have worked out well.




With regard to all the wins in the area of Holland 2003 , 2004

I know of only 3 wins that the M20 achieved in the area of the Netherlands in the years 2003, 2004.

- the Hoek van Holland-Scheveningen race of 23 may 2003 (distance race)
- The round Tiengemeente 2003 (distance race)
- the Oktober trophy 2004 (4 sundays of bouy racing)

In the years 2003 and 2004 the M20 was raced in ALL major Dutch regatta's. ALL of them. That is some 10 to 12 races a year in a very competive catamaran race circuit.

When Gunnar Larsen was still sailing F18's he won Round Texel and a score of other races. This M20 crew may be considered very good racers they other crews however are unknowns and are considered average crews.

Before you say that is a good score for the handful of M20's racing overhere I say :"please hear me out".

The Hoek van Holland - schevening 2003. I researched that race some time ago as part of the NMBR rating system project. Something very weird happened there that complete stuffed up any rating system you could devise. The first M20 sailed by Gunnar and a second M20 sailed by a nobody finished 15 minutes ahead of the fastest non-M20's after 2 hours of sailing. By doing so both the M20 of famous crew Larsen/Pols but also the second crew of nobodies outsailed a very competitive fleet and their handicap by 10 % ! On a day of force 5 winds, which arguably is a F18 day.

So I went ahead and looked at tidal current data for that day and contact various participating sailors. Looked at the weathercharts. And after a while we discovered what happened. Both M20's and about 2 F20 found a wind band a few km out of the shore and could sail it down all its complete length to the return bouy. The rest of the fleet had to tack a few times to get there. Ergo a weather anomely ruined the equality in windconditions for this race. Still a win for the M20 but it is very much a question wether it was the boat or same good luck.


Second win. Round tiengemeente. The M20 sailed by relatively unknown people won by 39 minutes after 3 hours of sailing. The M20 by Gunnar Larsen sailed for 3 hour 41 minutes and was beaten on ELAPSED by 2 F18's and a F20. Halve the fleet never finished as during the race the wind suddenly dropped away. Also the head of the fleet got caught without wind somewhere in the course when the eventual first finishers took a different route that would hold its wind for a while longer causing them to outsail everybody and all hot shots by 40 minutes in 3 hours sailing. Again hugely skewed data.


Third win, the oktober trophy 2004. M20 won by 1 point after the second place F18 crew has to use all 3 of their strikes out to get rid of 3 DNC's. When we look at the races where both sailed against one another the F18 (Mischa Heemskerk) crew won 5 out of 9 heats on corrected time and the M20 by Gunnar Larsen 4 out of 9 heats. So the F18 finally lost this race to the M20 because they didn't race on the first sunday of the series. But before we make this win out in to something it is not; Note how the M20 was now sailing of a rating of 94 which is the same as that of the Tornado !

So what is up with that claim that M20 beat Tornado's hands down ? It races currently of exactly the same rating aas a tornado and it still can't make a convincing win in any race. In more than a few races during the 2003 and 2004 period the M20 was beaten on elapsed time by either Tornado's or Eagle 20 carbon or F18's

Personally I think this is a very meger result when realizing that the boat weights 60 kg's less, has an A-cat on steriods rig as they say and is both 20 ft long and 10 foot wide. Compare this to the F18 and F20's. It seems that when the course is not a perfect upwind leg that than the M20 will be beaten on elapsed time and when the course is a perfect upwind leg than it has difficulty sailing of a rating equal to the Tornado while it is supposed to blow the doors of everybody.





Who says the Tiger F18 is the fastest F18 ?

Wouter

Sorry to say Wouter... Not even close. Sailing Anarchy Forum has just been announced the most visited Sailing web site in the world with 800,000 hits and 25,000 visits daily, overtaking Sail World, ISAF ect. I don't believe any other sailing forum would be in the hunt.




The M20 is faster than the Tornado (and is 9 foot wide) but as I said not buy that much. You will find allot has to do with the fact that the M20 sailors would be punters compared to the top Tornado crews which are full professional.


I think you will find boats like the Capricorn and Flyer soon come up and take the crown away from the Tiger. I believe these are superior hull shapes to the Tiger but the Tiger guys have spent MANY more years developing their rigs and tuning. Hobie cat are also paying full time pros who are the best in the world to race their product. That being said, their is not allot of difference between the F-18s.



Would be an awesome boat, not that it isn't now...... But from Marstrom it will be too expensive to really take off. You do however pay for what you get and Marstroms quality is second to non.



Hi Rolf,

I guess people will have to realise (or explain to newbies) that the T is the Ultimate OD production cat and as I said before, quality and performance wise the Tornado is in another league. If you want to get into HP spin sailing why not buy an F-18 then if you choose to go up another level get a T.

Late model Marstrom Sailors are generally made up of Pro or semi pro sailors (ie have some financial support) and those who are willing to pay for quality and performance. As you are aware, over a 10 year period a T would be cheaper than an F-18 to remain Competitive. It's just the initial outlay that you have to overcome.

If you wish to learn how to race a T you could start off in another class such as F-18 or buy a Reggie for example. This is what we did and you will learn plenty from it. Also, sailors being equal, the Reggie is not off the pace at a local level. We beat many a good skipper sailing Marstroms on our old boat and our boat had an 18 year old Reg White platform under it.



I only say this because you can see that down the track as with the masts, when their beam dies needs replacing they will invest in Carbon rather than prehistoric technology. And the price of Carbon at present is not far of Aluminium.

The 2005 Marstrom Tornado is priced at EUR 23,750.00 (USD 31,100) ex factory without sails and asymmetric equipment (export price without VAT).
Add EUR 5,500 for mainsail, jib, spinnaker, spinnaker pole etc and you reach EUR 29,250.00 (USD 38,250).
Add packaging and shipping and you get well over USD 40,000

Remember that one of the main advantages of having a longer hull length is not to do with drag but with the ability of the hull to handle the power from the sail. In the same way as an increase in platform width enables you to carry more righting moment (side to side) an increase in length enables you to carry more righting moment for and aft (I call this longitudinal righting moment). As the boat is pushed down wind the force on the rig tries to tip the boat forward eventually resulting in a pitchpoll. A longer boat can take more force for a given angle of tip or change in optimal trim. The centre of buoyancy of the hulls can move further forward on the longer boat.

Gareth

So for europeans :

23.750 * 121 % (VAT and Import duty as Sweden in not part of EC) = 28.740 Euro's

Landenberger Tornado Sail 2000 Euro's inc VAT
Landenberger Tornado jib 800 Euro's inc VAT
Landenberger Tornado spi 1200 Euro's inc VAT

Snuffer spi kit carbon tube = 1000 Euro's incl VAT

Total cost Ready to Sail Tornado = about 33740 Euro's so say somewhere between 33.000 and 34.000 Euro's

Nacra F18 is overhere 14.500 Euro's, Tigers bare about 15.500 Euro's, Tigers after fully upgraded about 18.000, Cirrus F18 17.500, Capricorn F18 about 18.500

So buying two of the most expensive F18's is only some 10 % more expensive then buying a ready to race Tornado. The Marstrom platform may last 7 years competitively but the sails won't. So the cost of sailing the sam Tornado competitively for 7 years (and one replacement of sails) is at least 38.000 Euro's when buying a completely new F18 each 3 and a halve years is between 29.000 and 37.000 Euro's depending on which design you want. So how much cheaper is that Tornado in the long run exactly. I think that the comparison comes out at about level when looking at internationally racing the best build F18's.

Now the F18 will very much win just the same because as a class it pushes a new line of second handers into the class each 3 years. Often at price below 10.000 Euro's. This is a great way at getting new sailors joining the class and grow the class. Superior quality is not always a good thing to have, that is when looking at it from a class perspective. The quality must be sufficient so that the boats are not totally shot after 3 years. It is just like making cars, if you make cars that last for 50 years than after 10 years you don't have a market anymore and can not use the cost savings of production at scale. Making all your case very expensive as well.

Wouter

Steve: You have many good points for going the F-18 route, or perhaps buying a Reg White or equivalent.

However, I would prefer to see the Tornado grow instead of promoting the F-18's (nothing wrong with F-18, but for now we are talking Tornado's. Thats my primary interest/consern).
So, when shopping for a platform, I can not really reccomend a platform for sailors getting into the class that I know probably will not take the strain added by the spi and double trapeze. I am not arguing the speed difference, as driver error will be more important, but avoiding major breakage is an important point. As far as I have been able to ascertain, only post '86 Marstrøms take the added load graciously. Hence my preference for Marstrøms platform.

I did not think about the dies for beams when I rejected carbon beams. Good point! But lets make certain that they can be buildt by anybody, or even home buildt, if they are allowed.

What do you think about the moulded sails discussion about to come? The class need to make a decision wether to ban or approve.


Pricing: Well, the boats are very expensive. Whatever way you look at it. But you will recoup most of your money when you sell again. If you are able to let the boat go.
The problem is the initial outlay, that scares many of the underfounded guys off.. (In hindsight, I can see that I was _VERY_ lucky with buying a Marstrøm the year before I married No way I would have gotten off with it now, with house mortgage, cars, kids etc..)

Yes, I do realize that, but still with this increase you can end up with a slower boat.

One more thing you need to remember is that if you make a platform ALOT lighter that you will reduce volume along the keel line of a boat so this in turn reduces your lateral resistance again. In some cases this will force you to reduce sail area (power).

As you see everything is linked to one another through the various ratio's. And at a certain complex of interacting ratios you will experience the best drive/drag ratio and that is the only one that determines the maximum speed you will reach. Depending on some specific choices like max weight and max overall weight this max drive/drag ratio can be found anywhere from say 22 foot to say 14 foot. Gut feeling will say you rather find it 20 foot than 14 foot but the law of physics may have a totally different opinion.

A good example is this. If we give the current F16's 20 foot hulls and keep everything else the same than that modified boat will be noticeably slower that the 16 foot F16's. Even if we make the boat wider as well we still end up with a boat that is noticeably slower in anything but really strong winds. And it may even be only just as fast in stronger winds when being noticeably slower in the light stuff. Adding 0.5 mtr width does not add that much power to the rig; this is a relatively weak relation.

Stuff like that

Wouter

Trampoline to heavy? Is your trampoline old, or made of solid cloth? Most tramps today are buildt with small masked netting, but the aft-beam might slap a bit in chop. Was this what you was thinking of?

Mine is maybe a 5 yr old Ullman. When large waves hit, the tramp kills the speed. It is heavy when wet and adds a lot of drag in waves.

For wing crossbeams, the stock width seems good. I plan to make some to so as to be stiffer and lighter than my Reg White beams.

Thanks for the comments. I'm impressed with the enthusiam this group has.

Tornados are great boats, but could be even greater with simple mods that would cost less not more.

I am disappointed to learn that they are going to expensive carbon masts when a spec wing mast could be really cheap, fast and provide more flotation in a capsize.

Elliott,

I am not quite sure, but I dont think there is anthing wrong with your trampoline (5 years old, you should have quite modern materials then). What you describe is probably chop hitting the underside of the trampoline and aft beam. The only thing I know that can improve this is steering technique and crew position.

What did you have in mind regarding "simple mods" to make the boat better?
There has been some discussion on the TornadoCat list about banning use of autoclaves in construction, and allowing carbon instead to make the boats cheaper and just as stiff. Opinions on this?

One of the arguments for the carbon mast was safety, making the boat easier to right. Would a wingmast in alu have made the boat easier to right? I dont know why they did not go for a carbon wingmast, when the mast was to be replaced anyway.

Following up on my own previous posting about T's and prices.

Looks like the australians are looking into the possibility of having some hulls produced down under.

Ref: http://www.aussailing.com.au/tornado/NEWSLETTER.htm

Interesting in view of the discussion here.

Any opinions on what would happend if autoclaving hulls was banned, and carbon allowed instead, while keepin the min. platform weight?
Would other builders besides Marstrøm find this attractive, and start to offer T's or T hulls as they did not need an autoclave to be competitive?

Another observation, the females are taking over the class at the top level. Female IATA president and female treasurer in NATA

Wouter
Is there an actual plan for Vectorworks or someone else to pursue production of a Blade F-18 model? I keep hearing hints of this.
Looks like this would be an area where Vectorworks could establish a reputation as a performance catamaran manufacturer first rather than dealing with the Emerging F-16 class.
CARY

There are but not by Vectorworks Marine. The current plans encloses a Australian Builder (they also invested in, build and raced the prototype) and another builder outside of the Aus and USA of which I'm not at liberty to say more. So in principle a US builder is still on the wish list but I guess Vectorworks will have first choice when it comes to that.



What ! You think F16's aren't performance catamarans ?

Honestly I think Vectorworks is doing just fine in establishing a reputation on the Blade F16. Any builder can make a 180 kg F18 that will hold together, even if it is a dud in performance. However designing a 107 kg F16, that performans AND takes the worst that can be thrown at it is a REAL show of skill.

Also I know that Matt got into the F16's because he himself wants to sail and race such a boat. With his wife as crew the F18's are too much for them. So I think you can say that Matt has some personal interest in the F16 class. At least more than the F18 class. I think Gina has decided as well and I don't think a 180 kg F18 was high on her list. So what is a husband to do ?

Anything may happen in the future. We all really don't know yet. But one thing is certain. Vectorworks marine will first go the F16 route before expanding their product line (if they decide to expand it)

Wouter