New single hander from San Francisco

Use this forum to discuss the latest changes in the class
Johan Backsin
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:38 pm
Location: Germany

Post by Johan Backsin » Tue Dec 13, 2005 8:39 pm

Check out this new single hander out of San Francisco.

http://www.gohoot.com/index.html

Clearly aimed for a different market, but there might be something we can learn from it.

I wonder if it sails at hot angles downwind, and if yes, at what wind speeds.

The rig is of interest. Low drag windsurfer style.

Compering the 2.5m wingspan and 10 sqm sail to our IC at 4m wingspan (seat extended to each side) and same sail area ..... seems like we're missing a opportunity of huge performance gain and only light weigths will competitive under the new proposed rule, and/or we'll be stuck with stiff rigs in search for power.

Great if any in our SF fleet could check it out.

Cheers, Johan

Phil Stevenson
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 9:54 pm
Location: Australia

Post by Phil Stevenson » Tue Dec 13, 2005 9:19 pm

Looks like a big heavy 1990 vintage moth with inadequate freeboard. Bet it is unsailable downwind in big waves and wind.
Already obsolete.
Design perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing else to add but when there is nothing else which can be taken away.
http://philscanoes.blogspot.com/

jimc
Posts: 782
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 7:45 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Post by jimc » Tue Dec 13, 2005 11:05 pm

Little unfair Phil, after all everythings outdated by a Moth. However I must say that big fat transm looks very 1970s.

Speaking of bigger rags I did like that recent quote from Rohan "Big sails are so 1990s" Its the trapeze bit I suppose- trapeze boats are such hideously hard work and so uncomfortable when underpowered.

Its one thing I'm liking as UI start to learn to sail an IC is that you don't have to be uncomfotable if underpowered. I must do something about a bigger radius on those foot cutouts on the seat though... Or is there a reason I haven't spotted for sharp corners?

andersp
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 6:48 am
Location: USA

Post by andersp » Wed Dec 14, 2005 6:36 am

Johan,

There were a couple of hoots sailing at the RYC midwinters last year. At that time they still had a wishbone rig on the boats which had some teething problems so I never got to line up with them to compare upwind speed. I just remember that I flew past it downwind with the kite up on my AC. Last fall I was supposed to take a hoot out for a spin, but the timing never worked out. Perhaps I will get another chance when the breeze comes back in the spring.

Anders
Anders Petersson
IC SWE-105

Phil Stevenson
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 9:54 pm
Location: Australia

Post by Phil Stevenson » Thu Dec 15, 2005 1:04 am

Sorry if I seemed a bit harsh, but when I started sailing there were about 10 classes to choose from now ther are about 500.

All because too many people have thought they could modify someone else's good ideas and create their own new class either for their own ego or for their business, and because they declined to work within the existing classes and organisations.

The result now is that very few classes get club fleets bigger than 10 and sailing as a whole is shrinking as a consequence.

This is why I am on the IC forum trying to support and revive a long standing but dying class rather than letting another 20 people create another 20 clone one designs for their own fragmenting purposes.
Design perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing else to add but when there is nothing else which can be taken away.
http://philscanoes.blogspot.com/

Steve Clark
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2003 2:26 pm

Post by Steve Clark » Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:47 pm

Lets all remember that Chris Maas has some legitimate IC cred. He built and sailed a very cool canoe in the mid 80s and definitely ramped the heavy air reaching ability of the boat way up. He didn't stick with it for a number of reasons, but he is a very good sailor, a talented designer and has developed technology to build cost effective light boats.
Yes, the HOOT looks like a value engineeered Moth, which is fine.
New rules IC will be 20kg lighter, a meter longer. have 0.6m^2 more sail and more righting moment.
I don't think we will be out performed upwind or down.
Will the HOOT develop a better racing program than the IC?
Given where we are, it wouldn't be hard, but we do have a significant head start.
SHC
Beatings will continue until morale improves

Andy P
Posts: 97
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 9:31 pm

Post by Andy P » Thu Dec 15, 2005 9:34 pm

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Johan Backsin</i>
<br />

The rig is of interest. Low drag windsurfer style.

Compering the 2.5m wingspan and 10 sqm sail to our IC at 4m wingspan (seat extended to each side) and same sail area ..... seems like we're missing a opportunity of huge performance gain and only light weigths will competitive under the new proposed rule, and/or we'll be stuck with stiff rigs in search for power.

, Johan
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

The IC major dimensions ( sail area, sitting out power) are not changing, so the range of crew weights should be the same as before.

I'm intending to try a similar single sail windsurferish ( or mothish ) rig. This should have more power than the main + jib, and less drag in a breeze.

Interesting that the hoot is only a few percent bigger than a moth, but it weighs nearly 2 and a half times as much ( and 20kg more than a new IC )

Andy

Johan Backsin
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:38 pm
Location: Germany

Post by Johan Backsin » Fri Dec 16, 2005 8:29 am

The Hoot is targeted to be a mass market boat. They tried to find a blend of -- High performance, Low cost, Easy to sail, Easy to use off the water, Easy to buy and own -- to appeal to a large number of sailors.

The IC is much more focused -- Ultimate performance. Its faster, more refined, but very complex to buy and own.

I think it would be beneficial for the IC if boats like the Hoot would be hugely successful. It would increase number of high performance single handed sailors. They are recruiting candidates to take the step up to a higher performance boat, the IC. A percentage of them would take the step.

The reason why I find the Hoot interesting in the context of the IC is the rig. First time a seen such type (windsurfer technology) on a dinghy, but I'm sure the Moth boys have been using something similar for ages.

Johan

Johan Backsin
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:38 pm
Location: Germany

Post by Johan Backsin » Fri Dec 16, 2005 9:16 am

”The IC major dimensions ( sail area, sitting out power) are not changing, so the range of crew weights should be the same as before.” (Quote: Andy P).

It will change, no doubt, only question is – by how much.

If the boat is lighter, the percentage of the sailors weight as part of total Boat + Sailor will increase. Heavy is slow. The lighter the boat, there difference between total Helm + Boat will increase for a heavy vs. light helm

Same thing goes for hull drag. Lower drag benefits lighter helms as they generate less power from the rig.

I haven’t followed the Moth class. I’m sure the ideal helm weight of today’s Moth is lower than 30 years ago as it got lighter and narrower (lower drag). Today’s rigs are more de-powerable which helped too.

The long waterline and huge wetted hull area has been great weight equalizers in the past. Water line is unchanged, but wetted area will drastically be reduced benefiting lighter helm.

Small sail might be elegant and competitive for light helms, but its limiting and incompetitive for heavier helms. The IC has the lowest Sail area/ righting inertia of any high performance dinghy, by far.

The ideal helm weight of the IC I estimate to ~75Kg. Take the average weight of the top-5 sailors in the last 5 worlds, and I’m sure you will arrive around that number.

I cannot understand why we’re not looking into bigger rigs as we are anyhow changing everything. Bigger sails makes a huge difference in fun factor in the lights, and balancing big sails downwind in a breeze is exhilarating.

Johan

Oliver Moore
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2005 8:24 pm
Location: USA

Post by Oliver Moore » Fri Dec 16, 2005 5:42 pm

my estimate is about 185 lbs, which i think is about 85 kg. But Goodchild brings it down significantly and it was really light.
Without Mark I think it gets closer to 195 lbs.

jimc
Posts: 782
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 7:45 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Post by jimc » Fri Dec 16, 2005 11:05 pm

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Johan Backsin</i>
I cannot understand why we’re not looking into bigger rigs as we are anyhow changing everything.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Andy and I have both rcently been in a class where they've had this big rig mania. Spoilt the boat in my opinion. Lets just bang on bigger rags is kinda like lets just have a bigger heavier racing car witha huge engine, Its just more interesting to be getting a lot out of a little.

Before you know it you'll be wanting fatter stabler hulls to get the most of the power, then big wide wings and a trapeze because the seat is too inflexible and there's a slippery slope to some big overweight monster. You can kill someone just as effectively with a big two handed axe as a rapier, but the rapier has far more style... For myself I'd rather have a couple of glasses of a really classy aged single malt whisky than get wrecked on two bottles of Southern comfort. Less really is more.

andersp
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 6:48 am
Location: USA

Post by andersp » Sat Dec 17, 2005 6:03 am

Well, if less really is more, think about how much more "more" would be... Sorry, but I still have problems believing that 10.6 sq. meters is going to be enough to get the boat going down wind. Especially when the wind is light. But maybe the upcoming trial in Florida is going to prove me wrong?

Anders
Anders Petersson
IC SWE-105

Johan Backsin
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:38 pm
Location: Germany

Post by Johan Backsin » Sat Dec 17, 2005 3:12 pm

I’m not advocating a rig out of proportion (big), but look at what size rig can be carried without making the IC more difficult to sail to the benefit of performance (and fun).

Let’s take an example. The Moth can hardly be view of being a “fat and stable hull”, nor giving heavier helms an unfair advantage. Quite the opposite, even to the extreme. Let’s compare – Sail Area / Beam

Moth: 8 sqm / 2.25 m = 3.56
IC: 10.6 sqm / 4.08 m = 2.60

The Moth has a 37% more sail area in relation to beam (righting momentum).

You can do the same to any exercise with any high performance dinghy and get to a similar result (like the HOOT).

Bottom line – If we want a faster IC and not looking at the sail area as well – we’re really missing out on an opportunity. If done within proportion, it will be more fun to sail too.

jimc
Posts: 782
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 7:45 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Post by jimc » Sat Dec 17, 2005 7:49 pm

I'm talking too much on this forum, I'm trying not to, honest but...

Guys, you're both talking as if going fast is all there is to making the sailing more fun. I believe there's a lot more to it than that. I've lost this argument before, but its worth fighting again.

The object of the whole exercise, as far as I am concerned is to, as the man said, to intensify life: to make life more fun. There are other reasons for racing sailboats, buit most are probably better served in classes other than the IC.

Now clearly none of us believe that there's a direct relationship between speed and enjoyment, otherwise we wouldn't be messing about in the water with sailboats . Face it the velocity per dollar is not great.

I'm going to have to drag up somne personal sailing history. For years I sailed Cherubs in the UK. More recently I've had a one off 14ft singlehander with a 12.5m^2 rig, and I've crewed a lot in other boats. All have been enjoyable in different ways. However I have learned that for me larger boats are not much fun.

The least enjoyable boat to sail in I've been in in recent years is a thing called a Boss, which is a largish two trapeze boat now rapidly heading for extinction. Its got big sails, it goes pretty fast, you're powered up and hanging right out on the wires in a F2, going in those conditions far faster than every other boat I've sailed and I was bored stiff. For all the speed it was about as interesting as driving a lorry at 70mph down the motorway (US = freeway).

In some ways the lest enoyable boat I've owned was the singlehander. No point in listing what was right and wrong with the design, suffice to say that although it was gloriously quick and quite fun to sail in the mid range I hated it both in the very light and in serious breeze. The canoe is far more enjoyable to sail in 2 knots than the singlehander was, while when the wind blew it was just a struggle with the sail upwind, for not actually going much faster in the moderate, while downwind though fast it was definitely wayward, and yes, in that sort of consitions I like the IC better too.

Then also, with the Cherub Class in the UK, I've seen an obsession with changing the boats "to make them faster and more fun". Brutally, the truth is in that time class numbers have plummetted to the extent that new boat builds are a third of what they were 10 years ago and there are barely two boats of the same spec in the fleet for you to have a race against. Andy won the Nationals with a pick up crew last year with ease. Now I suspect he was probably the best sailor at the Champs anyway, but frankly there was no serious opposition any more - no-one else had a campaign together.

So all this is the kind of baggage that I'm bringing with me. What does it tell me?

I firmly believe that if a class is in trouble then it needs to change before its too late. No doubt that the IC is in trouble: the AC has not just decimated the class but almost overwhelmed it in the UK. I'm not saying thats a good thing or a bad thing, right or wrong, but it is a fact. So I support the changes to reduce the weight and open the rules again. Got to really, its what brought me into the class.

But I lso believe that its important not to change to much. Too much change means there's no-one to race against. If you want to change everything start a new class, don't break an existing one. And, as above, I know something about starting new classes. I have some experience of how successful just going faster is as a policy. Lets face it, of the development classes in the UK by far the most successful is the Merlin Rocket, which wouldn't be able to spot a modern boat if it sailed past them in a cloud of spray - as they often do.

So I think the key thing is to make a boat more interesting to sail. And I think lighter slimmer hulls will do that. I''m not sure big rigs will. If its not a very big change all you do is move the band between too boring to be fun and too overpowered to be fun a bit down the scale. Big deal.

After all if you just want to go faster why the &&&& aren'y you sailing an A Cat? And in anycase the AC has got that base theoroughly covered. The less the IC and AC compete for the same people the healthier Canoe sailing will be won't it?

Now Chris, I'm relying on you to beat me for post lenth, and I promise I won't deliver that kick!

Phil Stevenson
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 9:54 pm
Location: Australia

Post by Phil Stevenson » Sat Dec 17, 2005 10:33 pm

Well said Jim.
I also support Steves proposed rules as posted. No more sail needed, the boat will be lively enough to be a challenge without frightenening off those who are used to the current IC size sails. Don not change everything, keep it looking like a canoe with a seat, to retain the purists, and make it more modern to attract the rest.

By the way the moths start depowering the rig upwind at about 10kts, by 18kts the top half is pretty well feathered out, so based on Johan's numbers the 10sq canoe should be deowering in only 12kts. sounds good to me.
Design perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing else to add but when there is nothing else which can be taken away.
http://philscanoes.blogspot.com/

Post Reply