Swift Solo

"Are there any plans to run production of the Solo Swift through a boat-builder in the UK?"

Actually, we have a builder that is close to being certified just across the way in Belgium.  I'm sure that they will complete the certification process soon and be able to take your orders.  By the looks of the work they've done, they should be very good.

Bram 

One of the reasons that the 14s have been getting narrower is due to the T-foil providing extra stability so they can afford to lose width. The evolution of winged keels proved to provide extra stability through extensive testing, so the same is probably true of T-foils on dinghys.

 

 

 

 

They also look pretty good as well!!

 

Edited by swiftsolo.org

Originally posted by Guest#260 I don't think that happens when the UK 49er fleet comes up against the I14 fleet ... I also think there are many more variables when you compare the 2 boats such as T foil rudders ... Anyway ... all the best with your project. Hope to race against one some time. Rick

Thats interesting intelegence Rick,  Im sure the I-14 fleet in Seattle will be relieved to know the UK I-14's are off the pace by so much.

Bram is making the point that regardless of foils or what ever other technology a narrow 14foot boat has achieved a superiority over a wider longer boat. Lets not depreciate that effort, its a huge improvement. That this doesnt occur in your patch may mean exactly nothing. Julian debued a smaller narrower 18footer which, as the experts said, couldnt have been faster, but his systems integration got him the world title that year and later. Guess we can now be assuming that Paul and the Seattle I-14 innovators are looking down that barrel too.  I for one sure hope so and cant wait to get done with my share of lasers and C420/FJ's and get more time in bigger and faster skiffs. Anyone for a narrow entry T-foiled 14 hull,  looking for a crew?

But looking back through the posts here and elsewhere its evident that there is a common thread to the posts from some people, who post a lot/and are experts in their minds, that certain things cant be done, while Bram, at least, seems to have done them.  There is such a lot of certain knowledge that 10 lbs makes such a difference, and resistance to the idea that a higher sail area to righting moment can be made to work, despite the knowledge (unless you want to call Bram a flat out liar) that the swift can be sailed well above the medium windrange for skiffs, even by an old fart. I dont think he means a novice though.

Rick you  sound incredulous about this in particular and are still calling for the photographic proof (although in a less obnoxious way now, after someone I saw called you on it a few months ago) and still posting that one photo of a deep stern wave lifting a musto 1/2 out of the water, a lonely  white horse in the whole frame.  Im sure its bloody hard to take a picture of yourself in that wind condition, maybe Bram should wait for a passing ferry to leap out of the water to satisfy you with such a snap, for what would that prove but exactly nothing if moments later the crew is teabagged and the boat comes to a catastrophic slap fest with the next trough. 

Perhaps your so incredulous because your know the Musto is such a handfull in heavier weather, then its just a pitty that the class rules dont allow the boats power systems to be adjusted, lowering the center of effort by splitting the sail plan (balancing the helm up and down) and changing the tip response and mainsail camber on the water,in real time, during racing, from the trap to accomodate the increased load as strawbery and bram clearly point out.

Sure puts my laser and my skippers little bethwaite production boat in the antique bin and that is one that could be made easy in blow.

Moreover, we keep hearing the hoary old lines like easing the jib isnt important, when skiff crews at the top have found that it is, and from one riteous expert that having a jib is no use at all. That they all tried sync'ed sails and failed, so it cant important/be done. One of our trans-atlantic buddies thinks having a assy is no use at all because of the proximity of concrete walls, whatever that means. I have heard about no breakthroughs from the new cat/canoe, a long time in gestation, and now in the water and assy boats are proving their metel, canoes and all + concrete walls.  My canoe buddy thinks that following experts that keep failing is not a logical idea. Perhaps he is right and I am glad there are some real smart people like Bram and Julian who just do it and make it work.

Getting the class development right is trick business no doubt, looks like the 14 have done it and the Swift Class too. Lets hope.

Good luck with your project Bram (which one is that?) and with the International Swift Solo Class too.

Just a as a last thought, I checked to see if these experts just keep knocking the swift when ever a thread about the class pops up, actually they habve an opinion on just about everything. Mostly all negative and delivering their superior knowledge and vast experience.

Spurt = drip under pressure, X is an unknown multiplier.

emough said, back to my brew and merry whatever to all.

WARNING - VERY LONG POST


"Bram is making the point that regardless of foils or what ever other technology a narrow 14foot boat has achieved a superiority over a wider longer boat."

Well, he's saying it - but has he proven it? It seems that all the people here is saying is that in other countries, 14s are not yert proven faster than 49ers.

"Julian debued a smaller narrower 18footer which, as the experts said, couldnt have been faster, but his systems integration got him the world title that year and later."

Errr, actually it got him the "world" title some years after the first B18 (Starboard Products) was launched. If you're going to throw insults around, check your facts first.

Secondly, the 18s were then a highly-restricted class, and only Julian's hull (developed from the two-handed Primes) was designed for the smaller rigs that were introduced later. That gave it a considerable advantage over the boats designed for 22 foot+ wings and big rigs.

The very big Murray "Chesty Bond"/"Prudential for Walshie" of the same era was  probably the most successful 18 ever. However, no more boats of that design were allowed. Therefore the big boat/small boat confrontation was affected by factors aside from sheer efficiency.

You say that there is "resistance to the idea that a higher sail area to righting moment can be made to work". Well, yes, there is. Note that the vast majority of skiff designers (well, those I've spoken to, which is most of the top ones) say that wing width and RM are vital. Paul Bieker was behind experiments that found a wider 14 would be faster. Frank Bethwaite says that "sail carrying power/total weight governs upwind performance".

So you accuse us of being arrogant if we don't assume that Bram is right. But if we assume that Bram is right, we are accusing just about everyone else in the game (Bieker, FDB, Murray Burns Dovell etc) of being wrong.

Ok, a well-known expert skiff designer sailed the SS a while ago and liked it. The very same expert has said that he did not believe the trap, wing and kite singlehanded skiff was the way to go for optimum speed. The same man had something very different in his workshop last time I was there.

You accuse those who ask for more info about the SS of being ignorant idiots. No, we merely say that other high-performance kite singlehanders have been developed by a former Open 14 world champ, world-class Contender and Finn sailors, Moth and C Class world champs etc. Why can't we get more info on why Bram knows more than Bieker, Bucko, Clark, etc?

It's interesting that when the SS came up against the Canoe at Huntington Lake, the results were conclusive - Canoes faster. Yes, the SS is still being developed, but the only world-class Canoeist was also new to kites and the other Canoeists (without spis) are mid fleet at the worlds IIRC. That's a lot of beatings for a boat that calls itself "simply the easiest and fastest sailing singlehanded skiff available".

Because the SS does not hide its light under a bushel. It callls itself "the ultimate singlehanded skiff". Bram says "most of the designers were barking up the wrong tree...they're wrong".

How can you accuse those who doubt the boat of arrogance, when those behind the boat are making such strident claims without proving it against top-class existing sh skiffs? How can it be OK for the SS crowd to say of other singlehanded skiff designers "they're wrong" WITHOUT having cleaned up against top-class ACs, MPS, Vis' and 700s, and then accuse others of arrogance?

It seems pretty damn strange that you think it's OK for the SS guys to tell most of the s/h skiff world that "they're wrong", but you find it appalling when people dare to ask the SS guys to back up their claims. If the SS claims to be the world's fastest singlehanded skiff, then they should back it up by beating the top ACs, MPSs and 700s. If they can't, maybe they should retract claims of being "the ultimate" and "the fastest".


Edited by Chris 249