Olympic Trials: Carbon Phantom

With recent specifications is 'vox populi' that the ahpc Viper F16 is a serious candidate to become the new Olympic cat, it was already on the spot when mixed crews were announced. Now Nacra has launched their own F16 and of course Falcon, Bimare and others may want to participate.
 
The forgotten project is the Phantom , the EpoxyCarbonCurvedBoardsCarbMast version. Will ask Udin but this is the Phantom F18 mold carbon laminated, this was the first intention of the Phantom Project. Check below label for more info.

We'll see some interesting Trials, no doubt about it.
Photo: Alex Udin's fcbk.

MOD70 Nr 05 with Yann Guichard

PressRelease by Spindrift Racing
Saint Philibert (France), September 27th 2011

The MOD70 N°05 will be lauched in Lorient in January 2012. It is the flagship project of Spindrift racing, a new company created by Yann Guichard and managed by Léo Lucet.

Given his proven sailing experience at the Olympic Games and at the helm of off-shore racing trimarans, French skipper Yann Guichard has decided to create and run a company focused on multihulls in order to support and implement international sailing projects.

The MOD70 N°05 will be lauched in January 2012 and will head to her port of registry, La Trinité sur Mer. The new boat’s characteristics match Spindrift racing’s values perfectly : high standards in terms of modernity and performance, reliability and durability. As the MOD70 is about to become the boat of reference for the next 10 years, the fact of being associated with such an innovative project represents a fantastic opportunity for a young company like Spindrift racing.

The upcoming Tour will be also a fantastic springboard for Yann Guichard and his team, bringing high visibility to the boat. The Multi One Championship will be paced by the European Tour, World Tour and Ocean Race with in-shore races held in major capital cities. 
----------
Full Press release and more info at Spindrift Racing 

New 18 Foiling Tri

Sent by Matt Mc Donald -














"We recently ran our first water test on a new 18’ foiling tri.  Falcon built all the tooling and has constructed the initial boat.  It has glass/foam core hulls, with carbon mast, beams and foils.  The concept is by Hydrosail Inc.and Dr Sam Bradfield, developers of a variety of other foiling designs.  (Scat, NF3, Rave to name a few) 

Some pics attached. This was more about making sure the vessel worked than trying to get publicity, we'll get more soon. This was the very first water test and a complete success.  The boat took flight in a bare 6 knots of wind and quickly accelerated to 12-14 once up. We have a few mods being made to the sail plan (note the very small F16 jib temporarily rigged) and hope to back in the water for a second round of testing next week.

This particular platform will be used for a variety of testing and continued development. Hard wing sails etc are in the works. Hydro sail will be offering this as a semi production race boat for those looking for a bit more tech and thrill." 
Matt McDonald - Falcon Marine

Formula 18: 1st Official South Americans, BA Week 2011

We keep pushing hard for multihull racing and the Formula 18 class here in Argentina, trying to spread the word to the rest of the countries. 
Last year James Baeckler (F18 FGral Sec) saw that we were having some guys from abroad on SBA 2010 and offered us to organize the first official F18 South Americans. Well here they are thanks to the support of the Yacht Club Argentino.


We have 20 boats and sadly many couldn't race, crews from Chile and Uruguay confirmed.
Brazil has no F18 fleet yet, we missed to bring some H16 guns to race.

The 1st SA will be organized by the Yacht Club Argentino (YCA) within the Buenos Aires Week 2011, that already has more than 500 boats in the diff participating classes. The growth of the local F18 class is quite impressive and we are all very proud of showing the traditional monohull sailing community in Argentina, what's Catamaran Racing all about after Lange and Camau lone rangers achievements.

The race days for the SA will be October 8,9,10. This weekend we start with the parallel SBA championship.
Now that the AC45s are showing the way for non believers, we'll try to put on a show too, people will get stunned by seeing 20 F18s racing, secene viewed only once here  at the Tornado Worlds 2006 (50 boats) 
More info to come, photos hopefully from the local Master photographer Matías Capizzano

Nº	Vela	Timonel	Tripulantes	Club
1	ARG 7	Mehl Sergio	Aragones Nicolas	AGUILA
2	ARG 162	Krevisky Agustin		N.PNA
3	ARG 163	Berberian Gabriel	Culotta Leonardo	C.U.B.A.
4	ARG 164	Caputo Alejandro	Mazza Sebastian	AGUILA
5	ARG 166	Petre Nicolas	Izorna Rodrigo	C.N.M.
6	ARG 666	Rodger Ian	Benitez Juan Martin	AGUILA
7	ARG 1062	Sucic Juan P.	Copani Juan Carlos	Y.C.A.
8	ARG 1069	Castro Memo	Collazo Jose	Y.C.A.
9	ARG 1123	Osuna Gustavo	Poclava La Fuente Javier	AGUILA
10	ARG 1124	Heuser Federico	Heuser Javier	AGUILA
11	ARG 1240	Vilate Christian	Vilate Pablo	AGUILA
12	ARG 1479	Gonzalez Smith Cruz	Heuser Mariano	Y.C.A.
13	ARG 1496	Faustin Bros Juan	Gonzalez Smith Lucas	AGUILA
14	ARG 2016	Blando Esteban	Martín Vanzulli	CVR/CNP
15	ARG 2127	Daneri Esteban	Acosta Rodrigo
16	CHI 1041	Kovacevic Nicolas	Kovacevic Lukas	RAPEL
17	CHI 1111	Gutierrez Alfonso		ACULEO
18	CHI 1132	Del Rio Humberto	Davila Benjamin	RAPEL
19	URU 115	Schewe Cristopher	Radovitzky Ricardo	Y.C.U.
20	URU 117	Grunwaldt Juan	Grunwaldt Juan	Y.C.U.

A-Class: 'Mayfly' update by Martin Fischer

Lots of talks on the web forums with some bad vibes beyond biased or performance technical opinions, so Martin Fischer decided, again, to express his view wide openly about the Mayfly project as he did while racing in Aarhus here in CSN.
Photo: Kristoffer West / Sailing Aarhus A-Class Worlds 2011
------------


MayFly A-Class Catamaran – an update Martin Fischer, martin.ncl /at/ gmail.com
Introduction
We participated at the A-Class Worlds in Denmark with the foiling A-Class catamaran MayFly. Unfortunately the boat was not successful at all. With the light winds that prevailed during the Worlds the boat was slow upwind. Downwind it was a bit better but not brilliant either. However tests in stronger winds that we experienced during the week before the Worlds were promising.
Over the last weeks I have been going again through all the numbers and this is a first summary of that re-analysis.

Flying catamarans – basic principles
Before presenting some results of that analysis I want to explain the main difficulties of designing a foiling catamaran. A sailing catamaran has 5 degrees of freedom: speed, heel (or roll), trim (or pitch) , leeway (or yaw), z-position (or sinkage) + rudder angle. On a normal sailing boat the speed, trim, leeway and sinkage are self adjusting and only the rudder angle has to be actively controlled by the crew, hence a normal ballasted sailboat represents a fairly stable system – at least within certain boundaries. On a normal catamaran that is flying a hull, things are getting a bit more complicated, since the heel angle is no longer self adjusting. The boat operates outside its stable regime and hence the crew has to adjust and control the rudder angle actively not only to sail a straight course but also to keep the boat upright.

On a foiling catamaran things are getting messy because in general the trim angle and also the z-position (flight height or sinkage) are not by itself self adjusting. A good helmsman obviously can control rudder angle and heel, but it is - in my opinion - beyond the capacity of human beings to control rudder angle, heel, trim and sinkage actively on a fast sailing catamaran. One solution for that problem is to install one or several sensors that measure trim and z-position (flight height) and that adjust trim surfaces automatically to stabilise the trim angle and the flight height. Hence the solution is to stabilise an inherently unstable system with an automatic active control system. This is the solution that has been applied successfully to the Moth and with less success to the C-Class catamaran “Rocker”. This control system can be mechanical (as on the Moth) or electronic sensors coupled to a microprocessor could be used.

Another solution would be to design the foils such that the system (foiling catamaran) becomes inherently stable, as it is the case for commercial airplanes. For the Mayfly I went for that option.

Pitch stability
In order to obtain a boat with self adjusting trim it is sufficient to look into airplane theory. The foil design must be such that if an external perturbation (wave or wind gust) imposes a change of the pitch angle the foils must create an angular moment such that the boat is pushed back to its original pitch angle. In mathematical terms such a “negative feedback” is characterises by the first derivative of the angular moment with respect to the pitch angle. This first derivative has to be negative and this “necessary condition” imposes a constraint on the position of the foils and most importantly on the size of the horizontal rudder foil! The position of the main foils and the choice of an L-rudder on the MayFly are a direct consequence of this stability constraint. Hence the primary purpose of the horizontal rudder is not creating lift – as many people say – but to create a negative feedback in order to ensure a stable pitch angle. And the position of the main foils on the MayFly relatively far forward was not chosen to improve the resistance against pitch poling – as many people say - but is imposed by the longitudinal stability constraint.

The lack of a negative pitch feedback is actually one half of the reason why boats with curved or canted straight foils and with no (or too small) horizontal surfaces at the rudders tend to jump out of the water once the lift created by the foils goes beyond a certain threshold. The second half is the flight height stability (see below).

To summarise: In order to obtain dynamic pitch stability (negative feedback) constraints on the longitudinal position and the relative size of the front and rear foil have to be respected.

Flight height stability
Once the pitch problem is solved we still have to figure out how to stabilise the flight height. Surprisingly this is the more difficult part. To make the problem clear let’s have a look at a T-foil. This is obviously an extremely unstable system: if the boat speed is below the necessary take-off speed the boat won’t fly and if it is above the take-off speed the boat will completely jump out of the water. Only if the boat speed corresponds exactly to the take-off speed the boat flies, which is for a T-foil obviously a very theoretical thing.

With surface piercing hydrofoils the dihedral angle of the foils provides an efficient way to control flight height. By adjusting actively the dihedral angle a desired flight height can be achieved for different boat speeds. On Hydropthère (60-ft flying trimaran) they use hydraulics to adjust the dihedral angle of the foils, Steve Clark used on his latest C-Class catamaran “Aethon” a lateral adjustment of the upper foil bearing for that purpose and on Alinghi-V they tested a special foil shape for the same purpose. This is a possible way to go but there are limitations. If the vertical load is shared between the leeward and the windward foil this configuration provides a stable flight height regime (within certain limits of course). The stable regime gets narrower as the load distribution between the two foils gets more asymmetrical and if the whole load is on the leeward foil (sailing on one “hull”) the width of the stable regime gets down to zero and the system becomes neutral (feedback equals zero) in terms of flight height.
Thus this solution still requires active intervention from the crew, which is difficult during a regatta and even more difficult on a single handed boat as the A-Class. Furthermore it becomes unpractical for a relatively narrow boat like the A-Class which sails most of the time on one hull.

I therefore went for S-shaped foils. The idea behind this approach is to change the dihedral angle automatically as a function of flight height. The foils are designed such that at low flight height the system is unstable which facilitates “take off” and at higher flight levels the regime becomes more and more stable. At low flight height the dihedral angle increases (more horizontal) if the boat lifts. This creates a positive feedback which means instability. This instability helps pushing the boat out of the water as soon as it is possible. However, once the flight height goes beyond a certain limit the curvature of the S-shaped foils changes sign and the feedback becomes negative. This negative feedback causes the boat to sink back in towards a pre-defined position. This predefined position is close to the inversion point of the S-foil.
Hence the primary purpose of the S-shape is to provide a negative feedback for the flight height around a pre-defined “working point”.
This is not at all the same as the winglets on the curved foils of ORMA-60 trimarans or of the maxi-trimarans in France.
To our knowledge this is a new technical solution to the flight height problem for foiling sailing boats and we have submitted a patent on it.

What went wrong with the Mayfly?
So in theory all seems to be fine and the question remains what went wrong with the MayFly? Over the last weeks I went again through all the number and I think I identified the main problem: the effective dihedral angle of the foils.

As I pointed out in the previous section the dihedral angle is very important for the dynamic stability of the boat. But the dihedral angle has also a strong impact on the total drag of the boat. For a given dihedral angle the ratio of side force to drag goes down (more drag for a given side force) and at the same time the boat is lifted a bit out of the water, which decreases the hull drag. So in terms of drag the dihedral angle of the foils has effects: a positive impact on hull drag (less drag) and a negative impact on side force related drag (more drag). For each dihedral angle there is a characteristic boat speed at which the breakeven between these two effects occurs. Or expressed in another way, for each boat speed there is an optimal dihedral angle. Hence the dihedral angle of the foils is a very important design parameter with a big impact on the performance characteristics of the boat and its control is crucial during the design process. This becomes even more important if you leave the usual “design space” as it is the case with the MayFly.

During the development of the MayFly I ran the computations under the simplifying assumption that the geometrical dihedral angle is a valid approximation for the effective or dynamic dihedral angle. The geometrical dihedral angle is simply given by

tan(dihedral) = A_horizontal / A_vertical

where “A” horizontal / vertical are the horizontal and vertical projection of the total surface of the foil. This angle can be easily computed from easy to measure variables. However, the relevant dihedral angle is the dynamic dihedral which is give by

tan(dihedral) = F_vertical / F_horizontal

where “F” vertical / horizontal refer to the horizontal and vertical component of the total force created by the foil. Due to the complicated geometry of the foil the local angle of attack at which the foil operates changes significantly along the span and hence the load distribution along the span differs significantly from the chord distribution along the span. This makes the computation of F_vertical and F_horizontal more complicated. During my re-analyses I (finally) computed the dynamic dihedral angle and compared it to the geometric dihedral angle. The result is that in the case of the MayFly foils there is a very significant difference between the two. The dynamic dihedral is significantly larger than the geometric dihedral and therefore the foils on the MayFly created significantly less side force than they were supposed to create. This pushes the breakeven point between the positive and the negative impact of the dihedral angle to significantly higher boat speeds than originally anticipated which is what we observed at the A-Class Worlds in Denmark.
I still have not fed these data into my VPP to quantify the impact but simply looking at the additional drag at low speed due to this lack of side force strongly indicates that this is the main explanation for the poor light wind performance during the Worlds.

A side effect of the lack of side force created by the foils is a poor tacking performance of the boat. If the foils create less side force than required the leeway angle of the boat increases and hence the portion of side force created by the hulls increases. The centre of effort of the hull is much further forward than the centre of effort of the foils which creates additional weather helm and therefore makes the boat very difficult to tack. I am living in New Caledonia and I have been running tests here with an A-Class with the same foil set-up – same rudders, same foil position - but with a set of S-foils with less dihedral angle. I cannot assess the speed relative to another A-Class boat (there are no other A-Cats here) but tacking is definitely much easier than with the boat I sailed in Denmark.

This problem with the dihedral angle of the foils is relatively easy to fix, but it requires designing and building new moulds and foils which will be done over the coming weeks.

There were other issues with the boat, but these are in my opinion second order effects:

Problems with bearings of the foils and hence with the toe-in angle of the foils
Lack of stiffness of the main beam, which caused also a change of the toe-in angle of the foils

Last but not least the overall preparation of the boats and the crews was insufficient. We were aware of that but the alternative would have been not to show up at the Worlds and hence miss the best and toughest opportunity to test the boat under real racing conditions.

Martin Fischer
----------------
Sent to publish in Catamaran Racing, News and Design.
Fischer is discussing his developments at Boatdesign.net forums. PDF of the report here

Belguim, RBSC Championships: Youths rule

Sent by Gill de Bruyne---
This past weekend we had thethe RBSC Club Championship. For one of the last Belgian races of this year we decided to give our boats to 2 youth teams.

In the pictures you can find the n°1 = Falcon red spi, and n°3 = Falcon green spi + dragoon and c1 podium.

80 boats at the start of which 60 cats where on the starting line. 4 Dragoons battling it out in the youngest class. With low winds 5 knots and the heavy current they had a hard time on the water.About 25 boats in both the c3 and c1 class.
The C3 was crowded with youth teams. Philip finished first youth on a third place in the c3.

In the c1 the there was 1 youth team on F18 and 3 on F16's.
They had been training the whole week in medium to heavy wind but weren't too confident to sail light winds. Weighing 138 kgs Anout&Klaas were the heaviest of the three.
3 races were sailed in dying winds and increasing current. Clean air and not overstanding the layline was key but difficult in these conditions.

The Falcon teams have had more training in races and were off the line very well each time.
It was great to see them battling it out in the front!
With steady top 3 finishes it was clear that they had done great! They even came across the line first one time!
Finally the prizes were given and they ended 3rd and 1st in the C1! Winning against some of the best Belgian teams. They were super proud! (me too!).
Great to see so much kids in the top 3, where 'dads' always dominated the C1 Class!
Gill--

C1 Class and Hobie Dragoon Class prize giving.
All pictures: http://www.rbsc.be/nl/fotos-en-filmpjes?oper=album,album=3335,from=wedstrijden,id=461
Full results: http://www.rbsc.be/inc/wedstrijden_uitslagen.dhtml?wedstrijd=461,language=nl

Nr	Zeilnr	Naam	Score	1	2	3
1	USA 666	Arnout Victor, Klaas Victor, D, Falcon F16	5,0	1	2	2
2	BEL 1	Patrick Demesmaeker, Alexander Koopman, D, HC Wildcat	11,0	7	3	1
3	USA 208	Philip Hendrickx, Gaetan Bols, D, Falcon F16	14,0	3	1	10
4	FRA 90	Kervin Tanguy, Joris Vanden Eynde, /, Cirrus R	16,0	9	4	3
5	BEL 6	Harry-Michel Peeters, Damien Bindels, Z, HC Wildcat	18,0	2	10	6
6	BEL 1438	Jan Verlinde, Iris Vermeire, D, HC Wildcat	21,0	4	6	11
7	FRA 811	Roger Cantin, Hugues Maquinghen, /, F18	21,0	10	7	4
8	BEL 4	Mathieu Cardinael, Véronique Dugardyn, Z, Cirrus	23,0	6	8	9
9	BEL 63	Annouck Philippron, Gilles Tas, D, HC Wildcat	28,0	5	5	18
10	BEL 1524	Rome Christian, Véronique Meynckens, D, Nacra Infusion	28,0	8	12	8

Formula 18 North Americans 2011: Robbie Daniel-Hunter Stunzi Champs

 All Photos by Photoboat.com -

Robbie Daniel and Hunter Stunzi dominated the F18 Nas with 7 bullets and 3 2nds over 13 races, worst result a 4th.
Mike Easton and tripp Bird on a progressing scale ending with 3 1st places on the final races reducing margin but it was not enough.
The Argie crew could not participate in 4 races and ended 22. Bad luck as they were performing, so next year at LA they will have a new opportunity in US waters, and also next weeks we have some serious racing down here too.
Left Robbie-Hunter, Tripp Burd-Mike Easton and Dalton Tebo-John Casey

More Info at http://www.f18northamericans.com
Full Results http://www.f18northamericans.com/index.php/results/results
All Photos by Photoboat.com -

Below a nice video of how Jill Nickerson and Redgear Racing supports their fleet even on the water with replacement parts and supplies, a very professional way to manage customer support , no wonder they say they have half the fleet at this NAs, Check the capsize save by the Argies at the end, specially the crew reaction.

P	Boat	Crew	r1	r2	r3	r4	r5	r6	r7	r8	r9	r10	r11	r12	r13	dis	Tot
1	C2	Robbie Daniel / Hunter Stunzi	1	1	1	1	1	3	1	1	4	2	2	3	2	[4]	19
2	Inf MKII	Mike Easton / Tripp Burd	3	2	2	4	2	1	5	2	5	4	1	1	1	[5]	28
3	Inf MKII	John Casey / Dalton Tebo	4	7	6	3	3	2	2	3	10	1	BFD	7	3	[55]	51
4	C2	Nigel Pitt / Taylor Reiss	9	8	7	5	6	5	3	9	3	3	BFD	2	8	[55]	68
5	Infusion	Pease Glaser / Jay Glaser	7	11	9	2	4	OCS	6	7	6	6	3	5	14	[55]	80
6	C2	Bob Merrick / Jonathan Farrar	5	10	5	13	BFD	9	21	6	2	7	4	24	21	[55]	127
7	C2	John Tomko / Ian Billings	6	3	4	20	30	25	11	4	1	8	23	30	7	[30]	142
8	C2	Chris Prentice / Patrick LaRoche	10	5	18	21	5	10	9	5	13	21	BFD	34	13	[55]	164
9	C2	Annie Gardner / Eric Witte	39	16	34	11	8	11	12	30	8	9	9	12	5	[39]	165
10	C2	Anthony Boueilh / Maxime Picard	15	9	8	29	28	12	24	8	9	11	14	26	10	[29]	174

The Lady behind the Racers from CriticalEnds Productions on Vimeo.

Multihull Olympic Trials: Inflatable Hulls will fit... in a bag

"Container-shipment-highway performance oriented catamaran is needed, please present yourself with it and show us that it will meet the (container) 'rule box'.... performing on the water is secondary and non critical issue" ....

Although practical requisites that may target more countries involved, selecting an Olympic cat on major requirements based on how it will fit anywhere else but on the water is not serious in my view.
Tornados, F18s and others are being shipped all over the World without an issue, why change that????
How much cheaper is a 20 footer?

-Regarding weights, well I know latest F16s can carry more weight and perform as its being done on the F18. So having a 120-150 weight range should fit the F16, F18 , F20c? or Tornado.

-If current requirements are not mandatory,  the Tornado mixed crews should be allowed to participate on the T, and we need to have a good trial with these 3 major platforms represented and see which fits better to current mandatory mixed sailing.
All disscussions will end on the water with the rotating crews

- There are two cats that comply with current specifications, two 16 feets, one quite old and the other quite new.
On $ acussations: They are always quite funny, any boat selected will have commercial interest behind it, so cut it off with that "probono attitude" , cause no one works building and selling cats for free ...it is a damn hard job to build cats and maintain logistics and customer service.
Again, on the water extensive and fair trials with several mixed crews should define which is the best cat for the job.

- What does not seems fair is leaving out the T before the Trials, a decent and honorable closure (if any) should be allowed, the Tornado Mixed crews are convinced on their boat, at least let them participate, no hurt for none... on the 20 foot container, a carbon two part mast and we can chop off  the transom AC45 style, so no problem at all.

Stop arguing nonsense, bring on the Trials and let any interested class or project to participate and show what they have for Mixed crews.... on the water.

Formula 18 North Americans 2011: Day 3

All Photos by Photoboat.com -

Robbie Daniel has complete control of this regatta. With Burd-Easton as closest competition with John Casey right there too. Bad day for the ARG crew, mast down, and not a single race of the 4 they had today. Another good day for Sergio Mehl to shine in the breeze. What a pity, lets see if they can race tomorrow to continue showing the good level he achieved in the local fleet.

More Info at http://www.f18northamericans.com
Full Results http://www.f18northamericans.com/index.php/results/results
All Photos by Photoboat.com -

All Photos by Photoboat.com -

P	BN	sail	Boat	Crew	r1	r2	r3	r4	r5	r6	r7	r8	r9	r10	r11	disc	Tot
1	25	USA 282	C2	Robbie Daniel / Hunter Stunzi	1	1	1	1	1	3	1	1	4	2	2	[4]	14
2	1	USA 11	MKII	Mike Easton / Tripp Burd	3	2	2	4	2	1	5	2	5	4	1	[5]	26
3	27	USA 1523	MKII	John Casey / Dalton Tebo	4	7	6	3	3	2	2	3	10	1	BFD	[55]	41
4	28	USA 241	C2	Nigel Pitt / Taylor Reiss	9	8	7	5	6	5	3	9	3	3	BFD	[55]	58
5	9	USA 90	Infusion	Pease Glaser / Jay Glaser	7	11	9	2	4	OCS	6	7	6	6	3	[55]	61
6	35	USA 215	C2	Bob Merrick / Jonathan Farrar	5	10	5	13	BFD	9	21	6	2	7	4	[55]	82
7	43	USA 240	C2	John Tomko / Ian Billings	6	3	4	20	30	25	11	4	1	8	23	[30]	105
8	15	CAN 12	C2	Chris Prentice / Patrick LaRoche	10	5	18	21	5	10	9	5	13	21	BFD	[55]	117
9	16	CAN 216	C2	Anthony Boueilh / Maxime Picard	15	9	8	29	28	12	24	8	9	11	14	[29]	138
10	29	AUS 244	C2	Annie Gardner / Eric Witte	39	16	34	11	8	11	12	30	8	9	9	[39]	148

Multihull Olympic Trials: 2,59cm Max Width (No Nacra F20 , no Tornado)

More info to come but ISAF has discarded the 20 footers, an F18 or F16 will likely be a chosen design. And what about the two part mast? also 120-140kg range and a 20 foot container ... http://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/MultihullRequestforProposal-%5B11321%5D.pdf

"...(a) Boat Characteristics:
2-person multihull type
Sloop rig with an Asymmetrical Spinnaker
FRP construction of hulls
Two part mast
Twin trapeze
Unsinkable when holed or swamped with approximately level flotation. The boat, when swamped, shall float with some portion of the freeboard, or deck above water
Easily righted by the crew without external help
Able to be shipped in a 6.1m (20ft) container
Trailerable maximum width 2.59m (8ft 6in)
(b) Performance – per the following approximate descriptions:
Racing is expected to be held in winds in the range 5 to 25 knots
Higher winds should reward the skill and experience of the sailor..." 

"...it is desired that the sailors combined weight will be within the 120-140 kg range "


"...(c) Disclaimer - Information presented in this Request for Proposal (RFP) is subject to change and that incurring expenses or beginning to formulate an approach in preparation for the selection based on information presented in the RFP is solely at the potential offerors risk...."
 
http://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/MultihullRequestforProposal-%5B11321%5D.pdf

Formula 18 North Americans: Day 2

All Photos by Photoboat.com -
Robbie Daniel and Hunter Stunzi are dominating the F18 NAs with 6 bullets over 7 races, followed by Easton-Burd and Casey-Tebo. With less wind the Arg crew of Mehl-Aragonés were back some places but mantaining a solid 4th place
More Info at http://www.f18northamericans.com
Full Results http://www.f18northamericans.com/index.php/results/results
All Photos by Photoboat.com -

P	BN	Sail		Crew	r1	r2	r3	r4	r5	r6	r7	dis	tot
1	25	USA 282	C2	Robbie Daniel / Hunter Stunzi	1	1	1	1	1	3	1	[3]	6
2	1	USA 11	MKII	Mike Easton / Tripp Burd	3	2	2	4	2	1	5	[5]	14
3	27	USA 1523	MKII	John Casey / Dalton Tebo	4	7	6	3	3	2	2	[7]	20
4	22	ARG 007	C2	Sergio Mehl / Nicolas Aragones	2	4	3	10	7	14	4	[14]	30
5	28	USA 241	C2	Nigel Pitt / Taylor Reiss	9	8	7	5	6	5	3	[9]	34
6	9	USA 90	Infusion	Pease Glaser / Jay Glaser	7	11	9	2	4	ocs	6	[55]	39
7	15	CAN 12	C2	Chris Prentice / Patrick LaRoche	10	5	18	21	5	10	9	[21]	57
8	35	USA 215	C2	Bob Merrick / Jonathan Farrar	5	10	5	13	55/BFD	9	21	[55]	63
9	43	USA 240	C2	John Tomko / Ian Billings	6	3	4	20	30	25	11	[30]	69
10	17	USA 32993	C2	Matthew Lynch / Bret Moss	16	12	11	15	32	ocs	7	[32]	69