The International Canoe

The forum for the International Canoe
It is currently Fri Dec 14, 2018 10:04 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 12:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 12:29 pm
Posts: 85
Location: United Kingdom
Has anyone taken the time to calculate the necessary width of wings when using a trapeze to equal the righting moment of a sliding seat? Having spent the last two weekends racing with musto skiffs etc. it seems that they have at least as much power in righting moment as the canoe. Perhaps its time to take a fresh look at this and what can be achieved.A little more is always so good!

_________________
colin brown


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 8:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:43 am
Posts: 15
Location: United Kingdom
There are some pictures of Anders' IC with racks and trapeze and someone has done something similar in Australia. If the forum search engine was working you'd be able to find them easily but its not so its going to be a question of routing through to find them.

But a canoe with a trapeze isn't a canoe (or is it?). Anyway, I think its rather nice to be the last international class favouring a sliding seat and I don't like trapezing anyway (you try it for 20 hours at a time and you'd not like it very much either...).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 11:36 pm 
Offline

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

The outer tubes need to be about 240 cm apart (120 cm from centerline) to get the same leverage as the seat. The difference in leverage due to leg length is less than 10 percent between people like you or me and Ola or Steve. However, I have more or less lost interest in this idea since it recieved about the same level of support as you got with your slurp at the worlds in Rhode Island.

Anders

_________________
Anders Petersson
IC SWE-105


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 11, 2006 8:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 12:29 pm
Posts: 85
Location: United Kingdom
Existing owners may not show much interest, but the youth of today do not want a seat, its all wings and trapeze. It would suggest a trial , for a limited number of canoes with proper feed back.

_________________
colin brown


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 11, 2006 9:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 11:02 pm
Posts: 654
Location: Australia
The youth of today want wings? Is there anything to back this up? I think it's more that its easier to get into a mass produced class. (At least based on people I've talked to).
My firm belief, is that we need to do more to get young people into the class: Let them take out your boat before a race, help them get into IC's and pass on gear and tips to them to keep them keen.
It's not the plank, I believe thats discouraging, it's a combination of older people sailing the class, cost of a new boat, and the apprenticeship in learning to sail one.

How we do this, well I'm still working on that one ;o)

_________________
http://icflatpack.blogspot.com/
IC Promo DVD: http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=zgdo4p90jHo
2008 IC Worlds DVD: http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=5_PUxqP0ssg

Australian IC Website: http://www.internationalcanoe.yachting.org.au


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 11, 2006 6:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2003 2:26 pm
Posts: 164
I think this is a very contentious issue.
My personal opinion, and how I think we should proceed to decide this issue are different.
I designed and built Anders a set of racks so he could test the system and compare with other ICs.
Will the boat be easier to sail?
Will it be faster or slower?
Pesonally I don't know, but without data, it sure is hard to say anything for sure.
Colin, if you want, I can send you a DXF file of the design I did for Anders and you can try it out yourself.
SHC
On the otherhand it isn't very hard to figure out.

_________________
Beatings will continue until morale improves


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 11, 2006 9:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 7:45 pm
Posts: 757
Location: United Kingdom
The youngsters at my club seem quite keen to jump on my Canoe and take it for a ride of a Sunday afternoon.

More to the point there's an awful lot to be said for being different. If you take a Canoe and cut the aft point off and replace the seat with wings and a trapeze then basically what you have is a very complicated and expensive RS600. That's not what you'd call a strong sales message.

Being a very different boat for the sailor who's been there and done that in all the mainstream boats may not be a recipe for selling thousands of boats, but I reckon that the IC - especially in DC form - with points and seat has a much longer term future than that of many more mainstream boats.

To use an analogy that probably only Brits will get British Leyland sold far more cars in a month than than Morgan ever sold in a year, but you can buy a new Morgan now, but not (thank goodness) a new Allegro!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 10:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 9:54 pm
Posts: 202
Location: Australia
I have just built my first seat in alloy, foam and glass at about half the cost of a what it costs me to make alloy moth wings and about 1/4 the cost of a carbon set. It also needed only a fraction of the time to make.

So I believe that converting a canoe to wings will only make it more expensive, more complex and probably heavier as the wings would have to be a lot bigger and stronger than those on a moth.

My near complete minimalist DC has cost me about $A6500 in materials, including professional sail and spars, about 1/3 of what Christians professional built new IC has cost. (More photos now on http://au.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/philst ... r=/64b6scd )

If we want to make Canoe sailing popular with more sailors, young or old, I think we need to look at reducing cost and complexity, and I doubt that wings would do that.

I have no predudice either way but as an example from a new canoeist, I have retained my remote interest in ICs for some 25 years until the Development rule finally brought me in. I think the efficiency of the seat is a major attraction and it sets canoes aside from most other classes, especially single handers.

There are two long established two handed classes here with seats/planks so the IC is not seen as something completely off the planet. Of these the Skates have recently allowed wings and trapezes but the one I have seen built that way turned out to be pretty ineffective.

_________________
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/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2006 4:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 8:42 am
Posts: 24
Location: Australia
Depending on the final outcome performance wise of Phil's new home built DC, I believe that the potential to construct a boat of this standard at home at the very reasonable price Phil reports could be part of the answer to increasing IC/DC fleet numbers.
This goes directly back to a previous posting where I suggested that the cost of all-carbon boats and the complexity of the rig fit out were two important factors holding the class back. Then I suggested a ply based construction with mainsail only and the minimal number of adjustables was a possible method to introduce new people into the fleet. The replies then indicated that most did not want to see (an inferior) second-class fleet racing with or along side the pro built carbon very high tech boats.
What will be the opinion if the DC that Phil built for AUD $6500 which converts to 2600 English pounds proves to be up to maybe 10% quicker around the course than a Nethercott based IC? (assuming similar standard helms).
Quite a few sailors would prefer to build their own boat than buy a Musto or RS 600 etc. even if they could afford to.
The photos displayed at Yahoo show a construction well within the ability of many who have built a boat before. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2006 8:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 9:31 pm
Posts: 97
My take on the development IC is to simplify the constructiona and fitting out of the boat, and so reduce costs on materials, fittings and one less sail )
One sail, basic rig adjustment ( downhaul, outhaul and vang only - no rigging tweakers)
Very simple constuction - but of all carbon and foam.
Keeping weight down means less materials. ( and lead is very cheap )
I found that when building moths, the selling price for the hulls was the same for ply (+ kevlar/glass/carbon) as for all carbon/foam.
The materials for the carbon boats were more expensive, but the time taken to build was reduced.

a quick guess of materials (inc rig etc ) would be about 3000 GBP, plus a lot of hours - havn't added them up yet.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 15, 2006 8:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 9:54 pm
Posts: 202
Location: Australia
That makes sense Andy, the amount of carbon is really quite small and would not add a huge amount compared to my composite plywood and carbon costs. And the hours involved in a professional carbon boat would be a lot less than in an amateur ply boat, so Pro built carbon is best value if you are buying, and amateur built ply is slightly less cost than amateur carbon if you are building, not counting the mold its needed.

The real savings are in simplification, no jib, simple rigging, minimum adjustments, smaller hull, and in both our cases no carriage. And sticking with the thread starter, no wings.

_________________
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/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wings and Trapeze
PostPosted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 4:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 6:55 pm
Posts: 42
Location: Ullswater
I'm interested in this thread although it's an old one! Has anyone tried trapezes recently? I'm interested in trying it in on an AC in the UK for the following reasons:

It's simpler and less to go wrong (my boat is old and everything seems to be breaking at the moment!)
It's more comfortable.
I suspect it's faster and more efficient, particularly upwind as you're able to trim properly
It encourages you to power up the kite as properly rather than getting halfway up the seat and thinking "that will do"
It would drop a considerable cost of the price of a new boat.
I'm convinced that it would bring more interest to the fleet from younger people.
It's a development to the AC that won't fracture the fleet even more than the Canoe fleet is generally (including ICs) now.

Has anyone any thoughts?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wings and Trapeze
PostPosted: Tue Apr 20, 2010 9:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 11:02 pm
Posts: 654
Location: Australia
Craig wrote:
I'm interested in this thread although it's an old one! Has anyone tried trapezes recently? I'm interested in trying it in on an AC in the UK for the following reasons:

It's simpler and less to go wrong (my boat is old and everything seems to be breaking at the moment!)
It's more comfortable.
I suspect it's faster and more efficient, particularly upwind as you're able to trim properly
It encourages you to power up the kite as properly rather than getting halfway up the seat and thinking "that will do"
It would drop a considerable cost of the price of a new boat.
I'm convinced that it would bring more interest to the fleet from younger people.
It's a development to the AC that won't fracture the fleet even more than the Canoe fleet is generally (including ICs) now.

Has anyone any thoughts?


I never had the opportunity to sail Phil's AUS1 (a winged IC, which grew in sail size and shed weight via carbon upgrades over the 3 or so years I raced against her) - on the lake when I first saw it it stomped all over the other IC's, the flat water and strong breezes really suited it. At the time, National Champion Seth took it out after the Nationals and it had him exactly where it wanted him, some specky capsizes and what looked like a very hard time on the water followed.
Next time was at McCrae (year before the Worlds) and AUS1 - now with I believe another metre in the mast, and a main and kite to suit - got in a lot of trouble in the windy stuff, seeing the Nethercotts finish well ahead, in the light stuff the next day AUS1 just got the fleet in a shortened drifter race.
Last time was at the pre-words again at McCrae, where AUS1 (now with a carbon stick to go with that big rig) and still it was IC's that came home ahead of AUS1 and other AC's

From this there doesn't appear to be much reason to sail anything but an IC, however all these courses were triangles - and I know that the AC really doesn't lend itself well to triangular courses.
Did the wings look like they offered much advantage? Well yes and no, watching Phil trap off the end of the wings upwind in a blow was pretty cool, but when the boat went over it looked like it took longer to right than your average IC. The wings themselves have to be pretty large too, to be able to give you the range of movement that a sliding carriage offers -and unless you can make it neat, you are looking at more stuff cluttering the dancefloor. With carriages now being built down to 2-3 kilos, there would be little weight gain in the wings and a lot more windage.

But the coolest thing about the IC class is that if you can build it and convince others that its worthwhile- the class and committee are happy to propose and approve beneficial rule changes pretty quickly. So if you have the time, give it a go (chat to some of the knowledgeable guys like Steve Clark and the like to work out a 'rule of thumb' for wing size) and show us in Germany next year.

_________________
http://icflatpack.blogspot.com/
IC Promo DVD: http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=zgdo4p90jHo
2008 IC Worlds DVD: http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=5_PUxqP0ssg

Australian IC Website: http://www.internationalcanoe.yachting.org.au


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wings and Trapeze
PostPosted: Tue Apr 20, 2010 4:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2009 8:20 pm
Posts: 24
Location: Leighton Buzzard
Maybe I am coming at this from a different angle I got into an IC because it has a sliding seat and no wings, the seat is so much easier on the leg bones and even though in the light stuff I spend time kneeling my knees are much easier after a days sailing than they were in an I Moth a Blaze or an RS 600. Finally only in a canoe do the people you pass (most of them) drool as you go past, a very respected man told me that after sailing a canoe everything else was like kissing your sister, true.
Mike Ewart GBR250


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wings and Trapeze
PostPosted: Tue Apr 20, 2010 10:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2003 11:12 pm
Posts: 96
Location: United Kingdom
My back ended up hurting so much trapezing (especially in marginal conditions) that the seat came as a great relief. A further benefit is in light winds you can slide it to leeward, so allowing you to sit to windward of the centreline - helps to save your knees!

_________________
Phil
K 41 Conquest
GBR 328 Little Scarlet


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group