Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... LastLast
Results 29 to 35 of 86
  1. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    678
    Expanding a bit on the drag thingy....
    You have the front wing pushing up and the back wing pushing down so built in inneffiencies from the start. I can only assume because the fin fitment on a standard board is too far back for a foil setup?
    If that's right then we need a board designed from scratch for foiling rather than a compromise?

  2. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by richarli View Post
    Expanding a bit on the drag thingy....
    You have the front wing pushing up and the back wing pushing down so built in inneffiencies from the start. I can only assume because the fin fitment on a standard board is too far back for a foil setup?
    If that's right then we need a board designed from scratch for foiling rather than a compromise?

    Yes, see my earlier comments on that.

    The there issue with adapting a standard slalom board to take a foil set up is that the loads on the box are much greater. That won't come as news to most, as we all already know you need a board with a deep Tuttle box to take a foil mast.

    But what hasn't been discussed is how the fore-and-aft average of a foil is much greater than the standard slalom fin. So traditional slalom boxes are built to take high sideways load but foils then break them because the foil puts a fore and aft load on the box laminate.

    If the foil was set in the board further forwards then any leverage on the box (front and back) would be reduced.
    Now back in the UK.

  3. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    3,429
    Quote Originally Posted by basher View Post
    Yes, see my earlier comments on that.

    The there issue with adapting a standard slalom board to take a foil set up is that the loads on the box are much greater. That won't come as news to most, as we all already know you need a board with a deep Tuttle box to take a foil mast.

    But what hasn't been discussed is how the fore-and-aft average of a foil is much greater than the standard slalom fin. So traditional slalom boxes are built to take high sideways load but foils then break them because the foil puts a fore and aft load on the box laminate.

    If the foil was set in the board further forwards then any leverage on the box (front and back) would be reduced.
    Foils can have the strut (or 'mast') further forward and be windfoiled, but from what I have read, there is an advantage to having the strut further behind the front wing for windfoiling (maybe in a similar way to the fin being behind the planing area on a normal windsurfer).

    There would be less fore and aft leverage in this setup (which is using a SUP foil to windfoil).
    Last edited by boards_ronnie; 19th January 2018 at 07:28 PM.

  4. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by smidge View Post
    This area is interesting. Whilst my foil is incredibly exciting and I dont regret it at all, I cant deny the limitations that 1) hassle of assembling it, disassembling it and cleaning it, 2) the hassle of needing to bring my big deep tuttle board along, 3) needing to have consistent deep water, 4) the learning curve / the pain of crashing....., 5) the cost. Its almost a different sport to windsurfing (road biking versus MTB).

    If these radical winged fin designs can bring half the early planing and a quarter of the excitement of foiling, whilst being useable on normal boards that many of us carry, and without so much learning curve then they will be a useful development. I was particularly interested in the Virus type design with the wing halfway down the fin, rather than the design with the wing at the bottom, as I presume the halfway down approach means that if the wing breaks free you wont have quite the same falling off a cliff sensation as you get on a foil, as there will still be the bottom of the fin providing lateral support and a tiny bit of lift. I also guess this design is less susceptible to falling apart the instant you gently scrape the sandy bottom, and is easier to make stronger. Probably a bunch of downsides though.
    I think that's a fair summary. I also worry that other have experimented (eg Virus), but not brought to sale. OTH I believe the big expensive Formula foils are designed to flex laterally to provide lift, so it's not totally left field. Really need a forumite to take on risk on one and report back.....

  5. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    3,876
    Whilst some seem to get a buzz from the "out of the water" foiling I have yet to see any real evidence of the initial claims of being able to plane in winds much lighter than can be achieved without the foil......with the right kit and good technique. If someone's primary aim is to be able to plane in light airs I reckon there is more mileage to be had identifying the right board and sail and tuning both for optimum low end performance.

    When I said I think there is more development that could be done with fins, they play only a minor role with modern wide boards in getting the board on the plane initially, but are then more important in order to maintain the planing whilst not also creating levels of drag that limit speed. Despite the importance of the fin to the overall performance of the board we still have little valid advice on fin design for any specific board. We are obliged to experiment with size, profile, rake angle, stiffness , construction, etc, to find a fin that matches a board and the conditions............and that can prove very expensive. It is therefore more than likely the case that very few of us other than sponsored sailors, are using the best fin for our needs. Some easy gains to be made therefore if that could be fixed.

  6. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by mikerb View Post
    I have yet to see any real evidence of the initial claims of being able to plane in winds much lighter than can be achieved without the foil......with the right kit and good technique.
    Ultimately I guess the best evidence for that comes from the PWA, where they can race foils when the big slalom gear isn't working. But I don't entirely disagree, on Formula gear I believe I've planned in as light conditions as my foil, but the cost is a lot less, and the experience a ton of fun (not saying light wind formula is no fun).

  7. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    678
    The hot snot from lanza is that the slalom foils are 2 or 3 knots slower in the same conditions as the light wind slalom set up.
    But it's early days. The slalom camp in a few weeks time may see quite a few upgrades.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •